"Killing the Myth" Topic

It interesting that a comment "Warpainters" sometimes make when you state that painting more than the barest minimum and in cases of desperation using unpainted minis minis scream "Why don't you use a board and printed cardboard markers it would be just as good" (I consider "flats" painted or color printed to be true figures by the by).

Well last night put that myth to bed forever. We have been playing a "campaign" over what is in effect a 16 ft by 6 ft board of a complex nature. We are coming to a natural break in the game, night has fallen and my troops need the evening to rest, replace, plan artillery distributions and observers for the next phase action. In truth we have been playing only sections of the virtual board (because we have no room, time of terrain to set up the whole board) each section of which is accurately reproduced each evening it is needed at the club using Hexon II terrain.

However both my nemesis and myself agreed that this section of the map which has yet to be assembled, needed viewing. The map though accurate is not enough, having seen the real thing the plans of both sides will need to be revised, when the terrain is viewed in all its glory it shows its glorious complexity and certainly on viewing has lead to me re-assessing my next line of attack. It illustrates in a small way, why the best generals find the need to go up to the front an see the battlefield, not just look at the map.

Even looking at the terrain its important to visulise where and how large the models are compared to the terrain feature, to get a tactical understanding of the ground. Similarly in play you need to have models the correct size to allow fast assessment of where the cover is.

So when you hear the refrain "Why don't you use a board and printed cardboard marckers it would be just as good" reject it in the sound knowledge the gentleman has no real understanding of warfare and the complex working of the human mind. He probably just really like over detailed figures and cares little for the complexity and challenge of model warfare.

Painted figures and an accurate table are not mutually exclusive. You need both.

If you are using a map for the game it does give an accurate description of the ground for that game. And many games do this. If you translate the map to a board, then for details, they will be different.
If you have to plan based on the map, and implement on the table, this goes some way to countering the issue of the all-seeing General.

Over on the board wargame groups you can find this exact rant in reverse.

advocate, not sure I understand all of that. Neither the map or the ground lets you see the enemy forces, or even your forces not yet exposed to the enemy. That data is kept by the opposing player and exposed when the time is correct. It does mean you have to trust the other guy. However we play to the best of our ability, cheating is pointless it removes any chance of having an interesting game.

Torquemada – the number of rants I see on this site over unpainted figures frankly sometimes makes me cringe. But I assume that in your opinion (and yours alone) that you consider that not a rant rant but a statement of some sort of basic requiremet to be a wargamer, which of coures it is not.

Old Contemtable "why"? Painted figures are pleasant but by no means vital, it is possible to play perfectly well with unpainted figures.

To make matters worse if I have time I want to draw 12mm modern "flats" for laser cutting better to store and from 4 ft the visual impact would be minimaly impacted. 2D tanks are more of a problem , they sort of need to take up the correct volume in space. I have thought of a box of representative size but as it has to cover the gun and move the turret its its to my mind impractical.

In the end artistry to my mind should never compromise the game.

"He probably just really like over detailed figures and cares little for the complexity and challenge of model warfare." We all come to the table (no pun intended) with our own expectations of what a miniatures game should be. Expecting figures to be painted does not automatically translate in to liking overly detailed figures, or to not liking the complexity and challenges of gaming. It means nothing more than an individual's expectation that figures be painted.

UshCha:

I have to say and your not going to like this but, miniature wargaming is a visual activity. Painted figures are part of the whole experience. I would rather play a board game of the same battle rather than have unpainted figures on the table. I went to the trouble to do it and I expect no less from my opponent. They don't have to be overly detailed. However this is largely irrelevant for me because I always furnish figures for both sides.

I don't do flats and not sure what you mean by "flats". Sounds like a different hobby.

Cringe away!

Would this game be as good with unpainted figures?

link

Sure you can play it with unpainted figures, but why would you want to?

Would this game be just as good with unpainted figures?

link

At the very least do you have a can of blue and red spray paint?

Nope but red and blue on a tank would be a bit daft. To be honest the art work does little for me so I would not be too peeved if it was unpainted.

I am with Old Contemptible here. The spectacle is the whole point. If I don't care about the spectacle than use counters. I made a set of counters for Team Yankee for a few bucks to see if I wanted to invest in figures. Frankly, on a nice table they were pretty good. Nice color, top down views of tanks and squads.

But I often test rules with squares of cardboard. But that's in preparation for a game.

I'm with the spectacle crowd. The OP makes the unobjectionable case for 3D terrain. Yup.

I don't see any myth, nor was any particular concept destroyed.

Absolutely the appeal is in the presentation.

Otherwise I'd just play boardgames.

Not a rant, just a why bother.

I support the view that without adequately painted figures it might as well be a board game.

I do like the visual appeal of (well-) painted figures and nicely done terrain, but that's just me. I've played in games with un- or semi- painted figures (some of them even mine 8>0), and in college we sometimes used mere bases cut to correct size while building up our armies. All these games were enjoyable.

For me anyway, the point of wargaming IS the spectacle! I don't wargame just because I wanna wargame, for me, and I think many of you whether you want to admit it or not, half of the fun is organizing, buying, and painting our tabletop armies. If I just wanted to wargame I would just buy boxed armies, and Extra crispy would lose a good paying regular customer. (smile)
Some of you, I'm sure will disagree so I'll just leave this discussion with the stipulation that this is MY opinion, it does not necessary need to be yours.

"reject it in the sound knowledge the gentleman has no real understanding of warfare and the complex working of the human mind"

This seems to be a very powerful misunderstanding of what can be accomplished with wargames.

The fact that you readjusted your plan because you were able to see where terrain was exactly on the layout and how big figures were in comparison to it would have been something that most commanders before the modern era, and even in the modern era, would not have the benefit of doing.

As long as you know where all of your own troops are, much more so if you know where the enemy's troops are, you aren't replicating anything like war.

You're playing a game. If you're going to the trouble of playing with toy soldiers you might as well have them painted as you're creating a visual expression of something.

I agree with Shagnasty, PzGeneral and others.

I have said for years that our hobby is more about collecting.

Russ Dunaway

We never allow ourselves to know fully where the enemy troops are it would take a way half the fun! For beginners we will use dummy and real markers but for experts we give no such quater!

Old Glory clearly we have massively diffrent opinons, I have never seen wargaming as anything to do with collecting. No point collecting stuff to sit in a box.

Von Schwartz (and others) +1.

I have been known to use unpainted Atlantic Panzer Grenadiers as markers in a back to back game, Esci plastics painted in one evening (using early Humbrol acrylics and no primer) to field Hungarian Insurrection for the next day, cardboard markers to try WRG 6th edition and even figures made from pipe cleaners. Sometimes needs must, but it's not beyond most people's capabilities to slap a basic paint job on toys for the long term.

Ignore the glossy mags and look at early Airfix catalogues and Britains Detail. After many years of faffing about with different shades, I paint my horses a la Britains: black, white, dark brown & light brown. No difference on the table but easier and quicker to paint.

Here's a quick paint guide for WW2 Russians; it will work for any size up to 1/32:
Prime with a decent primer: khaki brown if possible, else white or sand.
Cover the complete figure with khaki brown.
Paint the base grass green.
Black boots.
Weapons: chestnut brown with metal parts gunmetal (silver is nicer with this style).
Faces and hands flesh.
Helmet dark green.
Varnish to taste… Job done. If you are painting plastics with acrylics you can skip the varnish. Easy, eh?

+1 Russ Dunaway

Just look at the MASSIVE sell offs on Ebay and elsewhere of unpainted lead.

My guess is only about 25% of all miniatures purchased ever see paint, and not all of those ever see a game table.

Extra Crispy. You are being kind with 25%. When we first released the Command Decision Tiger tanks the first 100 bags were shipped out before we discovered that they had been mistakenly packaged with all left treads -- no right one's making them all virtually unusable!! Only 10 or 15 were ever returned ?????

UshCha -- just because you paint and use them does not mean a primary interest is not collecting. All my figures in my massive collection (see, we even call it a collection) are painted, not all used and I still want them.

I was about to say Old Glory and Extra Crispy were wrong saying only about 25% see paint or were used. Then I walked out to my workshop and looked around and under and decided that I was wrong, as usual.

In my "glory days" I had about 8-9 "flats" (cut-down boxes about 12in, by 20in) full to overflowing with 15mm Napoleonic, SYW, and renaissance armies and about 20 more cigar boxes also full, some with Micro-Tanks. Most were painted about 25% were not, I still have about 25% unpainted.

Once again, 25% is being kind!! Perhaps 50%-60%

Russ

You may be impressed to know all my Old Glory figures are painted! Although I have a box of unpainted Blue Moon in the loft. I will get around to them one day…

Thanks to a recent documentary on Airfix I have established I am a STABLE: STash Accumulated Beyond Life Expectancy. I know I am not alone.

Facinating, I have virtualy No unpainted models aquired in the Last 10 years. The only unpainted stuff is mainlay spare turrets, to replace brocken or lost turrets and the odd vehicle I keep for "spares" if ever need to add/replace lost damaged elements. I think thare may be ancents somwehere but I may have trowen then out by now. I realaised for me pointlessness of storing stuff you are never goint tgo use. If its not being played with whats's the point?

Wise thinking, very wise.

Indeed it is and only further underlines how completely barmy I am.

Really nothing "Barmy" about it? Most hobbies such as coin collecting, stamp collecting, etc is just gathering and storing. Really nothing to do with the collection once you have gathered it. Plastic model building, once finished just sits on the shelve. Model trains -- just watch the train go along the track?
At least our "collections" do mostly get used in an activity -- even if not all of them?
It is what I have always seen as unique to our hobby of collecting?

Well put, Old Glory!

Er, no. What separates wargamers (the ones I have met over XX years of playing, making and selling the stuff) is intent. They intend to use what they buy. Storage is a by-product.

The intention of 'collectors' (of anything) is just to collect and store/display. For modellers the construction is the fun with intent to display. For chuffees a train moving on a track is actually being used, not stored.

I still buy, make & paint stuff. I plan games. I haven't played anything going on for two years now so it stays in the loft. The intent is there: I fail because I lack time, have a butterfly mind, have problem socialising and am not rich enough to afford a house with room to game in. I know this but still carry on. That's barmy.

UshCha (although I don't agree with the painting thing) is actually very sensible and I wish I was as disciplined as he is. But then you wouldn't have made any money out of me, Russ!

I'm rambling now and I've forgotten what the myth was. Perhaps I've mythed the point. Now I'm on to silly puns.

Von Schwarz! My coat, please…

Your coat sir! (bows deeply)