Timberhick Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 I would beg the people in charge to make painting more than a mere nod towards it while playskill is highly rewarded. I have noticed in recent years that game companies are more interested in just one aspect of this hobby, game wins. The miniature hobby is not just the playing of the game, but both painting and playing. Wyrd and the other game companies spend a huge chunk of their resources in making awesome miniatures for us to paint and play with, going to a tournament and seeing a sea of pewter armies is(imnho) a travesty to the game or even an affront to the company. I perfectly understand not having a painting requirement for this years Gencon, but I sincerely hope that next year's Gencon there is a requirement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blkdymnd Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 I would say painting should never be a requirement but should always be highly, highly encouraged. Some people will either just never have the time, be very self concious of their ability or lack thereof to paint, 3 kids and a wife (I'm there, but I still squeeze out time here and there), and some are just interested in the gaming aspect of it. For those reasons, someone shouldn't be refused a tourney because of that, but should have no shot at becoming the overall winner without it. But I do agree, it's a travesty when a company doesn't try to steer it's players into the complete hobby aspect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raf Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 I have to say I agree with both of you. IMO painting should be encouraged, but not mandatory (even if my own opinion doesn't matter so much because there's no chance I will ever go to a tournament :embarasse). I have to say the painting articles in the Wyrd Chronicles are so far the best I've found around. Please make more of them Wyrd, they are VERY useful. Hopefully, Malifaux been a skirmish game, everybody will find the time to paint 4 or 5 minis to compose a crew. This is how I see it: a new game system with a particular flavour, played with a few painted minis on a smaller (I mean a bit smaller than the usual 4' X 4') beautiful scenery. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redstripe Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 I have noticed in recent years that game companies are more interested in just one aspect of this hobby, game wins. I find it interesting that Wyrd is being referred to as a Game Company. While its true that Wyrd is publishing a game, they have a long tradition of supporting the hobby side of the industry. Wyrd hosts several painting competitions throughout the year and has even recently produced its own resin statues to award winners, statues only available to painting competition winners. At Gencon they regularly support the painting competitions there. I think painting and modeling will always be an important aspect of the Wyrd community. In my mind it is one of the primary aspects that sets it aside from a few other gaming companies. While I understand your concerns, I think you fear a future that is unlikely to present itself. Wyrd's history and with compeitions like Iron Painter show a precident. I believe Wyrd values the artist's side of the hobby and will continue to do so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeafNala Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 RANT WARNING: The following are the thoughts, such as they are, of a CRAZY old man. Reader discretion is advised. I've been involved with miniature gaming for awhile now. One of my observations is that of the many things this style of gaming is, a source of instantaneous gratification AIN'Tone of them. I would recommend a board game to those folks whose sole interest is the game itself. I've never played a wargame with unpainted minis AND when I was more active in gaming the type of games being played demanded several hundred minis...a LOT of drudgery style painting here. Each hour of gaming time required mucho weeks of painting time. HOWEVER, there are certain benefits gained from all that slave labor. The games I played were not just games; looking back at them, while I can't recall whether I won or lost, I can still picture in detail ALL the wonderful little cinematic moments my minis acted out; I can almost hear the clatter of hooves as my hussars charge across a rickety little model bridge into the colorful ranks of awaiting enemy infantry. I somehow think images of primer coated soldiers shove across a piece of tape into a unremarkable mass of nondescipt metal would be a joy to remember. Basically you get out of gaming & life what you put into it. I put into it a LOT of effort & have been rewarded with great memories, the comaraderie of other lunatics who shared my passion the visual wonder that miniature games can be, & a reasonable ability to produce colorful little pieces that have enhanced the quality of my life. SO...you pay your money & you take your choice. :irked: THUS ENDETH THE SERMON OF THE DAY. SAY AMEN...or not. :dead: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AoM Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 (edited) First of all, the painting will not be a factor at Gen Con except in the case of ties (most likely). This is a tournament that we're running to get people even more excited about the game, and to give people an incentive to buy their models early, play, demos, and join us for the other after hours events to get some games in. If you're running bare metal and blue tac at Gen Con, we'll probably look the other way. Speaking from an inside perspective on whether painting will or will not affect where you stand in a tournament, I can say that both sides are being considered while we're working on this. In a game where your crew in a Scrap sized tournament can be 5 models, expecting fully painted models is not unreasonable. They will not, however, be required. There will be a significant incentive to run a fully painted and based force, however. We're still working out details for this, but we know that some players don't care about painting, and some players care about painting as much as playing, if not more. We are also working on rules for proxies and conversions. We've seen a few sets of rules for organized play that, by the R.A.W., put pretty severe restrictions on that side of the hobby. We're going to leave a lot of room for players to get the models looking exactly how they want, but we're also going to have some very clear guidelines to keep everyone on the same page. blkdymnd is pretty close to what we're shooting for. You might slaughter everyone at the tournament, but if you didn't take the time to paint your army, you're not going to score as high as someone who maybe have a few less VP over all, but brought a fully painted and nicely based army. I'm confident that TheBugKing and I can get the rules pretty much straightened out in the next week or two, depending on work schedules and such. Edited July 20, 2009 by AoM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St. Anger Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 Jeremy, Let me know if I can help any... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AoM Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 possibly. TBK is in charge. I'm just helping to prevent all of the power going to his head. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St. Anger Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 possibly. TBK is in charge. I'm just helping to prevent all of the power going to his head. Good luck with that... I think it may be too late... TBK is power hungry!!! I am surprised that Kel has survived this long... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nerdelemental Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 Yeah! Let's shift the hate to TBK for a while! Powerhead! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redstripe Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 Maybe there can be a separate award for best looking crew at the tournament? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nathan Caroland Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 First off, please, continue to debate this and offer your opinions up, we're happy to hear them. In the end though, it is Eric or myself that will make the final call on this and will make it official. Whatever else is discussed or put forth here is good building blocks but don't assume it'll be the end all, be all. You know what they say when you assume anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Illustrange Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 I would beg the people in charge to make painting more than a mere nod towards it while playskill is highly rewarded. I have noticed in recent years that game companies are more interested in just one aspect of this hobby, game wins. The miniature hobby is not just the playing of the game, but both painting and playing. Wyrd and the other game companies spend a huge chunk of their resources in making awesome miniatures for us to paint and play with, going to a tournament and seeing a sea of pewter armies is(imnho) a travesty to the game or even an affront to the company. I perfectly understand not having a painting requirement for this years Gencon, but I sincerely hope that next year's Gencon there is a requirement. I completely disagree, not just globally with your opinion but also that game companies ignore the painting part. you see the Hobby is two-ways.. one side is painting, the other side is gaming. what you are saying is basically that the "competition" during gaming should also focus on painting.. but I think thats silly.. I mean the many painting competitions dont involve the gaming side right ? lets take the biggest company as an example... lets say someone enters golden demon with a unit of space marines, and the other enters a much better painted unit of grotz, but loses because grotz would never win from space marines in a game ? its completely silly, because the painting competition has technically speaking NOTHING to do with the gaming side. I understand and agree that it looks much better to see painted miniatures on the gametable, even people who dont want or can paint their miniatures for whatever reason would agree to that. but especially when talking about competitive gaming (tournaments.) it is in fact the game that matters, not the looks. and forcing these things together is unfair (as said before, there allready are painting competitions for the painting side, wich are usually much more rewarded and appraised than the game competitions as they are allready.) and also a bit stupid business wise, its allready an obscure hobby, dont make it even worse by alienating over half of the potentially interested parties. as for leaving miniatures unpainted being "insultive" to the companies ? not so sure about that, while I do paint my miniatures I often find my inproper paintjobs are much more insulting to the miniature than leaving it tin with a prime layer only also I dont see why a company should take insult by that. while its always good to see painted variants, the process from idea trough concept trough sculpt and final production, its allready rewarding on its own, and if people like and enjoy the final product but dont want to paint them, it shouldnt be insulting or any other negative emotion, after all, they like it so much its still ok in its bare form, a job well done Id say. so to round it up, I love the painting side of the hobby, but if anything the gaming side of the hobby is the underappreciated side of things (even tough we are talking about gaming miniatures here.. the game SHOULD come first, then the creative side.), lets not make that worse than it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nerdelemental Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 I've been a tournament organizer for MtG, Mage Knight and Heroclix and Mechwarrior, Hordes and WM. But my personal interest in playing miniature games is as a painter, hobbyist (assembling and modding and terrain building), socializing, and tournament player in the order of personal importance that I've just listed. Painting is very important to me on a personal level. However, I'm very much aware that the minute you mandate fully painted armies you will alienate some of the potential gamers that may very likely have their personal list of importance in the exact reverse of mine. Mandating painting will leave some players out of the game. However, this is a true skirmish game where 5-10, upwards max of something like 15 models will need to be painted, so that's not asking anything like the crazy expectations Games Workshop games have mandated in the past. It's not even close to the number of painted models you'd play with WM or Hordes. So it can be done. Over the years, having invlovement in many different bare metal mini games, I think the sweet spot is one of two solutions: either a completely separate painting comp where you award for best painted army or even best single painted mini. Alternatively, you award a small bonus toward overall champ score for fully painted army, but then you're not really looking at the quality so much as simply fully painted. So that would actually encourage not good painting on the hobby side, but simply spalshing paint around. I guess in the end I would loathe a "must be fully painted" requirement. It's just not that good for the overall enjoyment of the game aspect. Rewarding for it in some way certainly is good for the overall enjoyment of the game, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elysium64 Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 (edited) I agree that with the initial Gen Con promotional tournament it would be unreasonable to allow painted/not painted to affect the results, but I do feel that in future tournaments fielding painted armies should be encouraged (It is only 5-10 figures) with points/rewards in the league/tournament, after all we are trying to promote this hobby and your game in particular, and for other people viewing your tournaments it would be far more appealling looking at painted miniatures, they don't need to be Golden Demon standard, just a few flat colours will look far better when viewing the game table than shiny metal. P.S. I never play with unpainted miniatures, yet I am a fairly slow painter so for that reason I tend to choose to play skirmish games (Malifaux, Incursion, Atomic Cafe 57......) yet with larger games say 50 figs a side I try to find colour schemes that allow majority of figure to be painted with drybushing and washes and have just started to experiment with dipping. Edited July 20, 2009 by elysium64 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AoM Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 Maybe there can be a separate award for best looking crew at the tournament? Already confirmed by Eric yesterday. As for the future, once TBK and I get the draft ready, it will go over to Eric for him to tweak as he sees fit, I'm sure. Like Nathan said, nothing is set in stone right now at all. Well, nothing except the fact that there will be a tournament, and that there will be a prize for the best painted crew. That means you should order your crews now and start painting so they're ready for Gen Con. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nilus Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 Maybe there can be a separate award for best looking crew at the tournament? I think this is the best bet for any organized play. Maybe even two awards for best painted army and best painted miniature. Assuming you just have one winning prize for the tourney itself then you are actually favoring painting(2 to 1). I don't feel how good your minis look should ever affecting how well you play the game. Some people are just bad painters, with years of practice they might be average but never the best. Its unfair to penalize there lack of ability to paint. The equivalent would be having a painting contest where the painted models not only had to be played, but the person who painted them would also have to win. I'm okay with requiring a painted force to play in a tourney. I just don't think Jim should beat Bob in a tourney because Jim's miniatures were painted better. Especially since judging painting is highly subjective. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AoM Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 I'm okay with requiring a painted force to play in a tourney. I just don't think Jim should beat Bob in a tourney because Jim's miniatures were painted better. Especially since judging painting is highly subjective.What we'd been discussing was a bump just for having a fully painted and based force. there was nothing subjective about what we've been thinking about and discussing so far. merely an objective "is it fully painted or not" type of thing. The subjective, "best painted" side of things will be completely separate. We've just been looking at things where 2 people could go undefeated, but one has a fully painted army, and the other has a completely bare metal or primer army. They both played just as well, and there would just be a nudge from being fully painted. We feel there should be an incentive to paint, but certainly not a requirement. Best Looking Crew would certainly be a separate prize than the Tournament Champion, although the same player might win both. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redstripe Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 Painting. Gaming. Separate but Equal! (I say as I duck Rosa Parks's right hook.) As has been said earlier in this thread, there are two parts to the hobby, the painting and gaming. I don't speak for Nathan, but I feel it is Wyrd's intent to appreciate both sides of that coin with continued painting competitions and now with their new game. As Illustrange said very well, I don't think it benefits the game by forcing gamers to do something they don't want, just like we wouldn't force painters to play the game. Each aspect has its merits and even going forward with the exciting new project that is Malifaux, I don't think Wyrd is going to forget that they were first producing gorgeous miniatures for talented painters. I think you'll see our Iron Painter and Femme Fatale/Rotten Harvest/Total Testosterone contests right along side our new tournaments. Both will be there, separate but equal. (ducks) Rosa, cut that out! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nilus Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 What we'd been discussing was a bump just for having a fully painted and based force. there was nothing subjective about what we've been thinking about and discussing so far. merely an objective "is it fully painted or not" type of thing. Thanks for the clarification. In my mind that is fine. Although I also fully support back alley knife fights to settle ties in tournaments as well. But painted vs not painted seems less messy and more legal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AoM Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 Redstripe's brought up a good point. None of the tournament stuff was ever intended to compete with the painting contests. The Wyrd painting contests are totally separate from any painting prizes that might be involved with a Malifaux tournament. Malifaux might be Wyrd, but Wyrd is not just Malifaux (see Twisted line). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AoM Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 Thanks for the clarification. In my mind that is fine. Although I also fully support back alley knife fights to settle ties in tournaments as well. But painted vs not painted seems less messy and more legal. well, what happens when both undefeated armies are painted? There's always going to be rooms for "the simple joys of a monkey knife fight." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elysium64 Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 What we'd been discussing was a bump just for having a fully painted and based force. there was nothing subjective about what we've been thinking about and discussing so far. merely an objective "is it fully painted or not" type of thing. The subjective, "best painted" side of things will be completely separate. We've just been looking at things where 2 people could go undefeated, but one has a fully painted army, and the other has a completely bare metal or primer army. They both played just as well, and there would just be a nudge from being fully painted. Great, this I think is the way to go. Encouraging players to make some effort so all the games look good hopefully drawing in new players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keltheos Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 Sweet, game's not even on the shelves yet and someone's already brought up the 3rd rail of gaming - painted vs. unpainted... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AoM Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 You know us, Kel. we'll find all the problems. and if we can't find any, we'll make them up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.