[So, what do we think of the new Contrast paints?]

While it's true that newbies don't have said skills to start with, if you never move past Contrast paints those skills will never develop.

That said, not everyone wants to be a Golden Daemon level painter.

[So, what do we think of the new Contrast paints?]

From 'eavier Metal on Facebook on some things to be aware of:

I know this is a page for higher end mini painting but I thought I share my thoughts on contrast paints.

I had already made up my mind that they were not for me, before I ever used them.
Saturday I got the chance to try them out at the the Warhammer Citadel.

This mini was painted in two stages, the yellow and red on the head and gun were done at the store. The metal and trim were done at home. Total time painting not including drying time was about 15 minutes.

Okay so here are my thoughts. It is weird, it's like painting with snot. Lol, maybe not That bad. It needs constant attention as it starts to dry. It pool like an SOB, and you have to remove it before it drys. 
I wish they had the medium, so I could try it too.
You have to commit, once you start you need to get everything coated.
If I had had the option I would have painted the head and weapons off the mini.

So they are great for fast tabletop quality.
Just like GW claims.
I also think with a bit of time we will see some neat effects from using them.
Painting the trim and details over the contrast wasn't a problem.

Now the negatives, after it's down you're done. 
If you don't constantly wick away the puddles, the end result will look messy.
If you mess up while painting trim or details, it's going to be hard to match the contrast color.

Final thoughts.
I think if you are only interested in getting an army on the table fast then this is a dream come true.
If you are a new painter, I'm afraid they could prohibit you from learning important fundamentals. The fundamentals needed to fix the touch ups.
If you are a competition painter, other than interesting effects that will surely be discovered as time goes on, then I would say they are a pass.

For me, I plan to paint up the several hundred zombies I have for Zombicide and some other board game minis. Other than that I don't honestly think I will use them in my regular projects.

I hope this helps.

I have some ideas I'll be trying myself with some Contrast paints, but it seems like two thin coats is still better than one thick one. I think we could get some very interesting effects by playing with the undercoat for example.

Attached is the mini posted with the original post:

[So, what do we think of the new Contrast paints?]

The time saver is definitely a plus, but a lot of the colors "pop" more than I'd like. That said, I do have some ideas I am planning on trying with the stuff.

[So, what do we think of the new Contrast paints?]

23 minutes ago, gjnoronh said:

And he said on twitter took him 1/2 the time to do vs his traditional NMM approach.  He had some issues with the consistency to get the results he wanted but thought that was an experience issue for him.

 

He also commented about it being a matter of working light to dark which was a learning curve for him as well.

That said, I can see a vibrant NMM look coming about from this as Contrast pops some bright color.

[So, what do we think of the new Contrast paints?]

It seems in the hands of anyone who is a wizard with a brush this stuff is liquid talent. Anyone want to see how to do NMM gold with it? 

https://razzaminipainting.blogspot.com/2019/06/non-metallic-metals-with-contrast-paints.html?m=1

[What % of the armies you regularly field are painted?]

5 minutes ago, Laststand said:

Lots of interesting different approaches. I personally try to paint incrementally. Get the first 1,000 done, then 1,500 and so on. I have found painting the same army continuously can lead to a bit of fatigue with doing the colour scheme over and over. 

@Dead Scribe out of interest do you pick a colour scheme and army look yourself or leave it up to the painting service to do the typical paints from the pic on the boxes?

 

Incrementally is my approach as well. Lets you shift things around if you start getting burn out, makes it easier to add a couple new things here and there and generally is more manageable for long term projects.

[What % of the armies you regularly field are painted?]

5 minutes ago, sorokyl said:

If you buy everything new at full retail, sure. But even buying 1 box at a time at those prices is doing your wallet a disservice.  I usually buy new on sprue or new in box kits for 50-70% of MSRP (cheap enough that i can always get rid of it and not have lost money), or used models/armies for 25-50% of MSRP.  By buying stuff I know I will eventually want when a deal comes along, I save a lot of money.  I also enjoy collecting models even if they are not painted.   

Everyone has different hobby goals and different things work for different people. 

While true, many of us pay full price because we're supporting our FLGS. Store has to make money if you want to be able to keep coming back to game there.

The only reason I'd pick up used models at this point is to help another gamer out if they were needing some extra cash and I wanted in on that army.

[How do you deal with toxic players?]

The biggest bit of advice I can offer (mainly coming from my experience working customer service) is to be polite, but firm when correcting them. Don't let them bait you into a shouting match, don't let them dictate things by trying to pressure you and don't be afraid to call for a third party if need be.

Most of us don't like being confrontational. We came to have fun, get some games in and don't want to rock the boat lest it ruin things. The thing is that sort of passive stance always opens us up to being cheated by players who play by a WAAC approach. So throw it out the window. I'm not saying to be an a-hole about it, but if they want to argue about their "creative" interpretations of the rules, then tell them they can either play in a more sporting manner or they can't play in your events anymore. It's not discrimination to ban a cheater. It is discrimination to allow a cheater to keep playing just because they fit into a minority group (and yes, positive discrimination is still discrimination).

[What % of the armies you regularly field are painted?]

My nids were 100% painted, my Sisters of Battle were about 1/3 painted but I was actively painting them, but my original Beasts of Chaos army in 8th was unpainted (largely because interest in WFB tapered off almost entirely and I lost motivation to paint them). I've realized I've got a bad habit of not finishing my painting projects though, so now I'm working to fix that and at the same time learning new things to push my painting to a higher level (I've been a pretty decent table top painter for years, but I'm looking to break the ceiling I've hit by learning new things and putting in brush time to get there).

So not many games for me in the near future, but everything will be painted if it touches the table.

[AoS 2 - Beasts of Chaos Discussion]

We'd need to wait for the GHB, but a SEQ (Stormcast Equiv) is a given. Otherwise looking at the top 3 and assuming buffs would be a good way to go since we'd generally want to optimize for most commonly seen armies.

[AoS 2 - Beasts of Chaos Discussion]

Desolating Beastherd is pretty much the go-to for most of us. It has a lot of flexibility with a low count of required units making it easy to run.

[AoS 2 - Beasts of Chaos Discussion]

14 minutes ago, Satyrical Sophist said:

Honestly I quite like the beast lord. He basically lives for Gavespawn though. Give him the Gnarl blade and he kills most foot heroes pretty reliably, and has a good chance of spawndom.

Seems really weird to object to him based on the mandatory artifact for one of the Great frays. I mean the Great Bray Shaman is at odds with Blade of the Desecrator since he wants to stay out of combat, but the blade makes you chase hordes. 

Blade of the Desecrator is just a bad artifact. Quite a lot of the mandatory artifacts or command traits are, it's one of the toggles they have for balancing them.

My problem with the Beastlord is two fold: first his synergy with the army is too much of a mess. I don't care how thematic a rule is, if it takes a paragraph to explain it then it's not a good rule. Having listened to a Stormcast so with Jarvis where he talks about killing your darlings that rule was definitely a darling that should have been killed.

Secondly, unless a character is specifically written for a given subfactions, they should be viable in all subfactions. The fact that the Beastlord is only good in Gavespawn isn't a glowing endorsement for how well his rules are written, it's more an endorsment for Gavespawn for taking a hero tax and managing to make him have a niche use.

And all melee weapons are bad for the Shaman. The thing is that a melee weapon shouldn't be bad on a melee character. Underwelming compared to other options perhaps, but not outright bad.

I'd rather the Beastlord had an aura of run and charge so he'd have more synergy with units that can't take a command as well as getting to do so himself.

I have my qualms with Allherd are many (it has a trait that wants you to charging every turn for the leadership buff, but the command trait is for buffing summoning and not buffing our charges (say giving a unit 3d6 choose the highest for 1cp). Alternatively if it wants to buff summoning it should give a second sacrifice every turn for a CP since 1d3 would be actually useful when compared to the 1 for 1 trade.

As it stands Gavespawn is the always choice, Dark Walkers is the sometimes choice but Allherd is the never choice and that's just sad.

[AoS 2 - Beasts of Chaos Discussion]

Beastlord needs a rework from the ground up. His command ability is a paragraph long disaster full of clauses, and is at odds with the Blade of the Desacrator since the command ability makes you chase heroes, but the blade makes you chase hordes.

[AoS 2 - Beasts of Chaos Discussion]

If we mean this leak that cropped up on Facebook now as well it's pretty suspect. I mean unless GW hasn't been able to sell a single Endless Spells kit for Box I don't see the Taurus getting that cheap.

 

EDIT: And chances are it's fake or GW threw it out online to watch the reactions.

[AoS 2 - Beasts of Chaos Discussion]

I saw a confused reaction on my post about top end play, so let me clarify a little:

Tournament meta is only useful for those playing in that meta due to differences in scoring leading to armies gaining extra points on kill points, painting, sportsmanship or whatever else the TO wants, meaning that rankings aren't purely on a win/loss ratio which makes it less useful for more casual players.

Likewise, annecdotes about personal experiences can be a decent guideline for people to avoid major pitfalls, but should never be taken as gospel due to differences in local metas.

So while I appreciate personal experiance, I find the worth of one unit over another can be drastically different based on who you play against.

[AoS 2 - Beasts of Chaos Discussion]

The shift in the meta will be more than just our book, which can shift what is "good" for us (who knows, maybe our new meta turns into a Warherd one, ot Monster Mash becomes more viable for us).

That said, I'd guess we'll see it on pre-order next week at the soonest, and the last week of June at the latest.

[AoS 2 - Beasts of Chaos Discussion]

Top end competetive play means next to nothing to me due to how they s ore tournaments being often different than how we score games (via secondaries to break ties and the like).

I appreciate that you've shared your experiance, but I can't hold it to be universal. GHB2019 will be shaking the game up here in a month or less so we can always pick back up on this topic in the future.

[AoS 2 - Beasts of Chaos Discussion]

Even when dictating the game you can't avoid taking casualties. If your Ungor survive being punched in the face they're not going to be swinging with 40 models. The fact you need to make excuses to justify only a maxed sized unit comparison shows that the comparison isn't flawless.

Ungor only trump Gor at full size. At any other size Gor trump Ungor. Especially when comparing MSU units. Which means Gor are going to be useful for longer than Ungor after that first round of combat.

I feel like everyone looked at those max sized unit numbers and then stopped considering that you can't keep those units at those sizes for the entire game.

I admit to being a bit stubborn about what I think about units. I mean I was running Repentia in a Sisters of Battle army back under Codex Witchhunters. The thing is, I also did really well with said Repentia despitr bring told they were bad because I found ways to use them effectively. And I feel like Gors do have good uses and clear benefits over Ungor and Bestigor, but I am assuming everything in the book has some utility, even if it's a bit more niche.

[AoS 2 - Beasts of Chaos Discussion]

The reason to compare medium sized units though is because you can't expect to be hitting the enemy at full strength everytime. Sure if you manage to get to hit first with a block of 40 Ungor it's good, but chances are more likely you'll be hitting with less.

[AoS 2 - Beasts of Chaos Discussion]

2 hours ago, Myrdin said:

I can appreciate your enthusiasm regarding Gors, but at the same time it should be said that bunch of people tried their best to justify Gors... and they were not able to do it in any actual capacity. Some limited use ? Yes, maybe. But full fledged dependable, good choice to pick ?  ...Not really, no.

Gors dont have a good statline and are contested by 3 other units that can do the same, and do it better in most of the time. Having 3+ to Wound, would go miles for these guys, They are for all intent and purposes just younger, naked Bestigors without big weapons. The stat line should be closer to that, rather than being pretty much the same as Ungors are.

30 Bestigors, are super cheep tarpit that can actually kill stuff with relative ease. Tuskgor chariots are fantastic in greater numbers. Single models are good, but 3-4 chariots in a single unit has the durability and board coverage, solid speed. They are pretty much a budget price Dragon Ogors.

Ungors are able to strike 2" with spears, and as  the same time allow other units (mostly Tzaangors) to strike through them with 2" attacks. Since they have 25mm bases, you can get 3 lines to attack through the gaps.

And to put a cherry on top > Centigors are superior in every single way to Gors, at the same price tag. Sure, not a battle line, but who cares about that really. Filling out battle line in BoC army is super easy thanks to different general type bringing their big boys to the Battleline slot.

So yeah, Gors have no real place to fit in. Trust me, I wish this wasn't the case. I wish they had more umpfh, or a special rule or something. I have 40 of these painted, and another 30/40 unpainted > mostly due to them being not worth the time since they wont see the table anyway with the plethora of other choices left open to us.

Gors could be solid if they got fine tuned a little bit, but so could be said for most of our stuff thats not up to par with some other choices.

You mengioned Ungors, but basic math shows Gors do as well as them or better despite having smaller numbers.

I agree Bestigors are plainly better (easilly 2-3 extra damage per round of combat over Gor), but I feel that they also a lot more expensive and don't have rerolls while also running 40 extra points over Gor for 10 and 90 extra points if you take a full block of 30.

And the thing is, with GHB2019 coming I won't be surprised if that turns into us paying even more for Bestigors than we do now.

I won't deny they hit like a small truck, but I suspect GW is going to points cost them to better reflect that too. Which means that it's worth looking at what strengths Gor have for future proofing.

[AoS 2 - Beasts of Chaos Discussion]

54 minutes ago, kenshin620 said:

Well technically you don't need gors, you can take tuskgor chariots!

But then you need to either buy the chariot or chop up stuff to make your own.

True, but I see the chariots more as summoning fodder since they work more as a distraction.

Then again that could be just the model influencing my opinion.

[AoS 2 - Beasts of Chaos Discussion]

3 hours ago, kenshin620 said:

I think the problem isn't ungor vs gor

It's Bestigor vs Gor.

 

Unless you're really strapped for points (or want Slaanesh Battleline) , mind as well pay extra 30pts for bestigors.

Bestigor aren't what I'd class as a bully unit like Gor though. That said, we need all three for Desolating Head there, so might as well try and leverage their strengths.

As a couple of idead of how I'd use Gor: firstlyas a screen (since you can get a reasonable hit in and take wounds fairly well, if not even better than Ungor in melee depending on your load out) for Bestigor, but pull casualties in such a way from the Gor that the Bestigor can pile in through the new hole and chew through what's left of that unit.

Alternatively, ambush both the Gor and Bestigor but send the Bestifor after buff heroes and the like while the Gor hunt support units like Ballistas.

We have a deep tool box and if you only go for a hammer you're spending extra points you may not need to spend.

Also, as an additional thought: Gor could also be a screen for Bullgors or Gorghons depending on how you run the list. 

 

Ungor, to me, are little more than objective stealing chaffe. You take just enough to snag objectives or protect your Herdstone shaman and that's about it. In many cases multiple units of 10 may be better since it can reduce how many you can lose on a turn while speed bumping your opponent from claiming objectives in your territory.

[Painting models: how pointlessly persnickety are you?]

I don't really considering myself persnickity, but I'm definitely the kind of person to paint details people can't usually see. Why? Mainly because I don't think about it and just keep painting, but it's also a good place to practice new ideas since no one can see if you fudged things up.

[AoS Race play style/Tricks to watch guide]

14 hours ago, PlasticCraic said:

@heywoah_twitch has got your back

 

It doesn't really give you a feel for how the armies play exactly as much as lays some general stuff down about each army and rank them to give you a feel for where they currently stand pre-GHB2019. That said, don't bank on the ranks too much as even the best army is little more than fodder when put into the hands of an inexperianced general. 

I'd recommend more to find an army that has the models and playstyle you like and go from there. Unless you're chasing the meta for national level tournament play it isn't the best method of picking an army.

[AoS 2 - Beasts of Chaos Discussion]

I've been catching up on the board, and I've been seeing a lot of chatter about Ungors vs Gors and the statements had me curious, so I did some mathhammer to get some ideas of how true the claims where. So I ran some math involving two units, a unit of 30 Ungor with spears and shields (most people's preferred way of running them) against 20 Gor with double hand weapon (they have the same save as the Ungor with shield in melee, and get a re-roll of 1s making it a bit more comparable. While I was at it, I looked at assuming how many models the Gor were able to pile in off of the charge against the assumption that the Ungor could get all 30 spears into combat:

Against a 2+:
30 Ungors with Spears: 30 attacks; re-rolling 1,2: 1 damage
20 Gors with a pair of blades (assuming 10 can fight): 20 attacks; re-rolling 1s: 1 damage
20 Gors with a pair of blades (assuming 15 can fight): 30 attacks; re-rolling 1s: 1 damage
20 Gors with a pair of blades (assuming 20 can fight): 40 attacks; re-rolling 1s: 1.5 damage

Against a 3+:
30 Ungors with Spears: 30 attacks; re-rolling 1,2: 2 damage
20 Gors with a pair of blades (assuming 10 can fight): 20 attacks; re-rolling 1s: 1.5 damage
20 Gors with a pair of blades (assuming 15 can fight): 30 attacks; re-rolling 1s: 3 damage
20 Gors with a pair of blades (assuming 20 can fight): 40 attacks; re-rolling 1s: 3.5 damage

Against a 4+:
30 Ungors with Spears: 30 attacks; re-rolling 1,2: 3 damage
20 Gors with a pair of blades (assuming 10 can fight): 20 attacks; re-rolling 1s: 2.5 damage
20 Gors with a pair of blades (assuming 15 can fight): 30 attacks; re-rolling 1s: 4 damage
20 Gors with a pair of blades (assuming 20 can fight): 40 attacks; re-rolling 1s: 5.5 damage

Against a 5+:
30 Ungors with Spears: 30 attacks; re-rolling 1,2: 4 damage
20 Gors with a pair of blades (assuming 10 can fight): 20 attacks; re-rolling 1s: 4 damage
20 Gors with a pair of blades (assuming 15 can fight): 30 attacks; re-rolling 1s: 5.5 damage
20 Gors with a pair of blades (assuming 20 can fight): 40 attacks; re-rolling 1s: 7.5 damage

Against a 6+:
30 Ungors with Spears: 30 attacks; re-rolling 1,2: 5 damage
20 Gors with a pair of blades (assuming 10 can fight): 20 attacks; re-rolling 1s: 4.5 damage
20 Gors with a pair of blades (assuming 15 can fight): 30 attacks; re-rolling 1s: 7 damage
20 Gors with a pair of blades (assuming 20 can fight): 40 attacks; re-rolling 1s: 9.5 damage

Against 7+:
30 Ungors with Spears: 30 attacks; re-rolling 1,2: 6.5 damage
20 Gors with a pair of blades (assuming 10 can fight): 20 attacks; re-rolling 1s: 5.5 damage
20 Gors with a pair of blades (assuming 15 can fight): 30 attacks; re-rolling 1s: 8.5 damage
20 Gors with a pair of blades (assuming 20 can fight): 40 attacks; re-rolling 1s: 11.5 damage

Basically, the way I see this is that 20 Gor can do the same job as the 30 Ungor (we all know that you'd be taking 30 and 40 respectively, but let's assume the optimal number made combat after casualties), but the more models they get into combat the better they do compared to the higher number of Ungor models do to each additional Gor bringing 2 attacks. This makes Gor great for doing two things: bullying multiple small units like warmachine crew, or bubble wrapping a bigger unit (or just a big base) with their pile in to maximize their attacks.

Plus a unit of 10 Gor still hit better than 10 Ungor due to being able to have re-roll 1s at their smallest unit size, while Ungor need at least 20 models to unlock the same thing, making Gor better for ambushing small bully units into your opponent's back lines.

The extra point of Bravery means the Gor also handle casualties better than Ungor. And if you want more of a tarpit, 30 with shields (saves 1/2% of their wounds each turn) will hold longer than the Ungor with shields (saves 1/3 of their wounds each turn), especially since the Ungor have to take a bravery check at one step sooner than the Gor do and can lose more models on average from Bravery checks.

Now this isn't to claim that the Ungor are useless. They are definitely great as a chaffe unit and can be used as a screen to dictate combat more effectively, but I feel Gor work well as a better tarpit in comparison, and are a better bully unit to ambush into your opponent's lines since they can do more with less models. 

Basically I feel like Gor have uses that we haven't fully looked into because there is some focus on them competing directly with Ungor instead of looking at how the units stack up and working out how to best employ those units from there.