"How far will you take your preference for painted armies?" Topic

Pictors question TMP link about preferred opponent got me thinking. Since there was such a clear prefference for a painted army -even if it wasn't quite to the rules- I wondered how far that prefference would hold. To that end I created 8 scenrios to test the love of painted figures.

For this exercise assume that both players are friendly folks with the same experience and knowledge of the rules. The first player has an army of models that exactly fit the rules and era/genre but less than half of them are painted.

Would you stil prefer the completely painted army if (consider each scenario separately) it was…

1) Right war, right army, wrong theater.
"What are these 8th army fellows in short pants doing in western europe"

2)Right war but army in wrong theater.
"What are these Soviets doing in Egypt?"

3) Right war but proxying for a different army.
"Your Soviets look an awful lot like Brit 8th army."

4) Right nationality, wrong war.
"Why do your ww2 germans have pickelhaub helmets?"

5) Proxying figs from wrong nationality, war, and theater.
"I guess these Boers will be standing in for your Soviet conscripts, eh?"

6) Right general type of fantasy or Sci/Fi fig (ex. rifle infantry) dropped into Historical setting.
"So those 40k Cadians will be representing the US second division?"

7) Right general type of historical fig (ex. rifle infantry) dropped into SciFi or Fantasy setting.
"Hmm, those Imperial Guardsmen look just like British 8th army."

8) Completely wrong genre and type of fig.
"Oh my, look at the red power armor on those Vieille Garde…"

I might consider 6. The rest, not so much. Unless the uniform differences are minor, like facing color. I'd never use WWII British in shorts outside the Med, but for AWI, I would certainly use a regiment that only served in the south to fill out the OoB for Bunker Hill, for example.

Oops, I actually created 8 scenarios, not seven as the post originally said. I've corrected the post which means that Rich is now referring to scenario 7. Sorry about any confusion.

I do not have a problem with what consenting adults do in the privacy of their own homes.
When you take it out in public is when it becomes problematic. We don't want to scare the horses.

If you are putting on a game of Raphia at a convention, I expect the proper elephants. Lots of companies can supply them.
If I'm doing a Sudetenland Crisis game in my basement, it's kind of OK to use American infantry as a proxy in a one off game, but if I'm going to field Czechs on a regular basis, I should try to find proper figures.

By the way, who does make 1938 Czechs, or can anyone recommend a reasonable facsimile?

Back to the OP.
I've done #1. In fact I have done EXACTLY your example.
But when I knew I was getting involved in Markrt Garden and Sicily campaigns, I cleaned up my act and bought proper figures.
Hey. I like to paint.

9) If it's not reasonably accurate, no go.
Example being early French Nap infantry in 1813 ok.
Russians in the western desert WW2, no.

I'm with Winston on this. You might do some things at home to test out rules or tactics, but when you take your army to a club or a convention, it should be the right army for the scenario.

For me, that means right nationality and right war. It can get down to theater or part of war, usually if the differences are conspicuous and certainly if it denotes different equipment and tactics. I'll fight Vimerio with British in Belgic shakos or Vittoria with British in stocks and gaiters, but I'd choke on 1940 British in Market-Garden.

My 5mm SYW Prussians have black gaiters. I know it's wrong for the summer battles, but I'm not painting two 5mm SYW Prussian armies.

Numbers 1 and 7 and 9 are about as far as I'll go. Especially with Napoleonics, French are French weather 1809 or 1815, etc.

1, 6, 7 and 8 work for me

I require historical accuracy in my Kaiju games. If the S.H. Monsterarts Godzilla is the 1964 version, there had better be Walker Bulldogs in Japanese colors and silver F-86's with Japanese markings. None of this 1990's Leopard tanks and MLRS arty with F-16's stuff. Now the 1995 Godzilla or later, we're cool. And don't get me started on a 1960's Gaos v.s. a '95 Gamera, makes my blood boil just thinking about it.:)

Nah. Life's too short. If the opponent's friendly I'll play anything in nearly any condition, I'm crazy that way.

+1 wrgmr1

My Napoleonic French time travel from 1796 to 1815. I'm not painting 4 armies.

But it's mostly about how visually close they are.

WW2 Soviet infantry, in 6mm, in 1985, sure.

*1 Extra Crispy.
I can legitimately have 4 different uniformed figures for the 23rd Welch Fusiliers in the AWI. I'm content with one. Any regiment with long service can claim the same.
And don't get me started on Continental Dragoons.

No. 1. This is easily overlooked. Plenty of times in the past troops have been shipped out from some place in haste to deal with a sudden crisis and there isn't time for new or correct uniforms to be issued, so they fight in what they've got until the supply train catches up to them.

I can think of lots of good excuses why those 8th Army chaps are in France in short-shorts.

One off or test – O.K. – I wouldn't do it myself, but…

Let's just say my 19th century colonial British have three different uniforms – Red, Khaki, and Gray.

Interesting responses all around.

Crispy makes a good point about scales. The smaller things get, the easier it might be to suspend disbelief.

For myself…
I'd be ok with 1, 2, 3, 4 and 7.

However, 2, 3 and 4 are only included because the alternative of playing against mostly unpainted figs is so darn depressing.

1 and 7 don't bother me at all. In fact, I'm currently awaiting the arrival of some WWW2 british troops. Once they're wierded-up with some gas masks there's a good chance they'll end up in sci-fi settings as well.

So then you guys would probably be surprised by this discussion:

link

I was hopeless lost after the 5th comment.

I'll stick with historical armies and maybe a little Tomorrow's War on the side.

Well Scott, interesting read and I found out about Calvinball. Is that a common insult in the 40K 'verse?

Scott. If I'm playing Madden, can I take the Raiders from the 70s so all my dirty hits in 2017 will be legal?
NFL rules change more often than 40K.

That's quite a reddit discussion Pictors, thanks for the link.

Seems like that group of 40k fans is almost the polar opposite of the TMP crowd. A remarkable number of folks who are obsessed with the "game" itself with little priortiy given to the visual experience. As someone dedicated to the "Spectacle of painted armies clashing…" (A GW quote if I recall) it makes me a bit sad.

Agree with Wrgmr1 above #9 reasonably accurate.

I don't know if it is a common insult or not. I knew what Calvinball is from reading Calvin and Hobbes. It doesn't seem like an insult.

As to the other question, I have no idea. From the context you seem to be talking about Football. Probably they would be legal and help you score way more homeruns than the other team.

It does seem like that group is not only the opposite of the TMP crow but that they are almost completely devoid of creativity in their gaming.

I wonder what that is a result of? My group never took rules out of a box, read them and then said: we should pay it exactly like this!