dont you hate overrated minis?

Ritual

New member
@hubbabubba
You will also find that if you post pics of a mini and ask specific questions or ask for opinions about specific things about the mini you will get more, and above all, more useful, feedback, than if you post pics and say \"any comments?\".

I often find that I have nothing useful to say about what people post and when you read the replies you\'ll find pretty much the same advice over and over. But when you get specific questions it is much easier for me, and probably for anyone else, to come up with something constructive and something we may feel more confident about being of use to the one who asked.
 

Jike Ichi

New member
Well, perhaps I\'m not a veteran at CMON. My impression is that this side is the best arround for improving your MINI painting skills.

You can find great articles, pics of other Minis, Discussions, Fun Stuff...and most of all a very nice and intelligent community.

And best of all its free. CMON is one of the sides I really visited for a long time before joining, because you can look at so many interesting things without being a member, which is GREAT!!

On the voting thing: Its not the main thing about CMON...Its a one way to get feedback on your MINIS. The only thing I would improve is that the poster doesn\'t get a vote for his own MINI. Cause when you start with yourself at 10 or at 6 really makes a diff with the same MINI.

But who cares, as long as you think you improved your MINI painting.
 

bullfrog

New member
While to a certain degree I do believe that beauty really is in the eye of the beholder I do understand where you are coming from. I first noticed the irregularities in voting if that is what you want to call it with certain types of minis not being as popular as others regardless of how well they have been painted. But this is still a site asking for people\'s opinions and as a result we are getting such. I think we all need to study the miniature in question when voting and vote only on the design and/or painted finish depending on which category we are talking about. Forget WHO painted it and WHAT they have painted. You don\'t have to like the subject matter but look at it as objectively as possible. Just because you are the painter\'s best bud doesn\'t mean give it a few extra points. On the other hand just because you don\'t like orks don\'t minus a few points.

I think the 2007 Aussie Golden demon is a good axample of this subject matter. In 2006 I was completely blown away by the skill level of all entries. But this year seems to have gone backwards and I was very disappointed with some of the winning entries. JUst don\'t look too closely at some of the golden demons scruffy messy painting, parts missing painting, obviously rushed parts. However there were many unplaced entries and lower ranked winners with superb paint jobs....I\'m talking breath takingly smooth painting. But I am not a judge and I don\'t know what was going through their minds when casting their votes and scores.I may be the only person who just doesn\'t get it. It is not a case of sour grapes as I, or anyone I am close friends with, entered the comp .
Once again comes down to personal opinion whereas it should be as objective as possible and adhere to criteria set out.
 

squidders

New member
The thing is that \"cool\" changes all the time and isn\'t an objective thing. It\'s utterly subjective and is only relevant on the day the vote is cast.

When I vote, I ask myself if it\'s cool... if it\'s a great idea executed well. Of course, sloppy painting detracts from the cool in a big way but I don\'t actually vote on what I think is the most technically proficient painting or sculpting.

I try to see what the artist was getting at and above all, if I like a mini I\'ll vote high and if I dislike it, I\'ll vote low. I\'m a bas*ard like that.
 

Jike Ichi

New member
If I don\'t like the -Out of the Blister-Mini- I always skip the voting anyway. Cause then I surely wouldn\'t be \"objective\".
 

Jike Ichi

New member
K, think you got me wrong there.
I just mean you like some \"naked\" Minis more than others.
\"Naked\" Minis I don\'t like and wouldn\'t buy or paint I don\'t vote for. Because I think I would not be objective. Though some peeps surprise me, when I see one of my personal neverever buy/paint Minis, actually looking cool and good with their paint job on it...

hmm...does that make sense now?..hope you understand what I meant.
 
S

Shadzar

Guest
Originally posted by Jike Ichi
K, think you got me wrong there.
I just mean you like some \"naked\" Minis more than others.
\"Naked\" Minis I don\'t like and wouldn\'t buy or paint I don\'t vote for. Because I think I would not be objective. Though some peeps surprise me, when I see one of my personal neverever buy/paint Minis, actually looking cool and good with their paint job on it...

hmm...does that make sense now?..hope you understand what I meant.

you don\'t vote on minis you don\'t like the manufactures sculpt of because you feel you would be over critical of the sculpt rather than actually rating the paint job.

that about right?
 

Amazon warrior

New member
I have this problem with Space Marines, of which there are seemingly thousands! I find them impossible to judge fairly. I look at one, think it looks ok, nothing special, then read some of the comments and see \"9: Wow! Brilliant conversion! Great use of fluff!\", or alternatively \"4: Dude, you can\'t do that, it says so in the books!\"

How can I form a balanced opinion when I don\'t have any frame of reference for these guys? The solution might be to get into WH40K, but that ain\'t never going to happen with me. I just skip them now. Oddly enough, I tend not to have this problem with minis from other manufacturers, but I think that\'s because generally they\'re much less fluff-bound.

Edit: Mind you, in my more cynical moments, I think I could really boost my rating if I could bring myself to buy a box of SM and painted them up half-decently... :rolleyes: Does that make me a bad person?
 
S

Shadzar

Guest
Originally posted by Amazon warrior
I have this problem with Space Marines, of which there are seemingly thousands! I find them impossible to judge fairly. I look at one, think it looks ok, nothing special, then read some of the comments and see \"9: Wow! Brilliant conversion! Great use of fluff!\", or alternatively \"4: Dude, you can\'t do that, it says so in the books!\"

How can I form a balanced opinion when I don\'t have any frame of reference for these guys? The solution might be to get into WH40K, but that ain\'t never going to happen with me. I just skip them now. Oddly enough, I tend not to have this problem with minis from other manufacturers, but I think that\'s because generally they\'re much less fluff-bound.

Edit: Mind you, in my more cynical moments, I think I could really boost my rating if I could bring myself to buy a box of SM and painted them up half-decently... :rolleyes: Does that make me a bad person?

the problem with psace marines and ALL Warhammer figures. along with their 3 color ninimum to play tournament the minis MUST be WYSIWYG.

that means everything on the army list for the mini must be on the mini so its easily distinguishable furing play.

its the dumbest thing i have ever heard of since they want an army to be fully painted in a single scheme. my crisi suit for my tau army are all different. no two intentially close to looking like each other. it would seem that would be more indicative of being able to diferentiate them while playing is that they look different.

the chia suit is the commander.
the dodge viper pace car one is his bodyguard.

etc.

that way i know whats what and can easily tell by the stats rather than trying to look at the minis to see what little \"bits\" are glued to it, and i can model my mini anyway i want without being confined to GW methods..only GW parts, GW paint, GW etc, etc, etc.

and sicne many armies have a set paint scheme some people get fooled into thinking that the colors chosen by the \'EAVY METAL team of painters is required for say an ultramarines army must be ultramarine blue.

its sad really, but luckily that will change as they now allow for creating your own chapter maybe people will get the idea better that the color scheme given are those that were chosen by the painters for the box art and codex art, rather than required colors.

its a two part hobby warhammer is. playing a minis game, and painting/modelling the minis.

and it should be that way.

i hope that explains some of the GW problems and how/why some of those people can\'t think outside the box on painting styles and color schemes for space marines.

but i agree that is a problem with warhamme players and what they like, but i wouldn\'t want to see every dark angels army painted dark angels green. why not spice up the colors a bit?

so don\'t look too down on the poor marines it is just the logic shoved down the throat of the players by the company and their tournament rules i think.
 

Amazon warrior

New member
Yeah, I thought it was something like that. I think I followed you? It\'s lateish here, I\'ve just finished three solid hours of German tuition, \'m not thinking well and your post was somewhat erratic.

I\'m not looking down, exactly, but it\'s not my thing and I find it slightly dsconcerting when faced with hordes of them on CMON and they all look like A. N. Other Marine to me. I know that to an \"expert\" there\'s a crucial difference between complicated gun 1 and complicated gun 2, and you can in theory have multiple combinations of weaponry glued to your figure, it\'s just very inaccessible to those not in the know, and seems like it could run out of control. WHFB I find less bad this way, but it\'s still prone to this kind of problem a little.

Other wargame companies don\'t seem to get this. For example, Privateer Press have very nice paint schemes for their minis. Some people follow them, and that\'s fine. Other people dare to be different, and this is also good. Nobody gets hot under the collar about it either way. Likewise Rackham, back in the day before they painted your minis for you (badly). In fairness, tho, the two I\'ve just mentioned use cards during play. I don\'t know how much of a difference that makes.

Edit: Of course, I understand that part of the point of the GW figures is their extreme modularity, whereas the other games I\'ve mentioned above are slightly less flexible from that point of view.

All in all, horses for courses. This is why I avoid marines- I can\'t give them a meaningful score.
 
Back To Top
Top