I think you made the point, commission painted armies don't usually win because they haven't put the time and effort in some people would painting their own army. Painting your own army will usually be a labour of love. I suppose if they say said army is commission painted and name the artist it's not a problem but if they are claiming they have painted said army and are taking the credit, that's not cool!
I truly hope no one does. But most people that get commission painted armies don't brag about it. They are enthusiastic about the paint job, but don't try to 'flex' on people.
I think it's a no period. The idea was intended for someone to win a prize for the work they have done. It's such a wierd concept to me that you would recive a prize for someone else's work. That's just ridiculous, if you didn't paint it you don't get to compete with people how did.
I think you put it well. People should be able to enjoy which part of the hobby they enjoy most. The issue really needs to be decided by the TO in my opinion. If the gameplay and painting are totally separate then it's fine, just exclude the commission pieces on the basis it isn't their own work. However when the two are combined someone running a commissioned army shouldn't be penalised points, or if there is just a "painted score" they should receive that. Personally I always think it should be two separate competitions with totally different scoreboards.
Good take. Personally I think anyone with a commissioned Army should just remove themselves from Painting competition, although I agree that they rarely win actual Best Painted. More likely they might win Best Overall.
also this guy: People who buy cars shouldn't be able to win car meet awards. You're paying 2k to the 'french artist' for a reason if you're routinely winning these things. I'd never spend my money there, but let them have this win. Dude just dropped a honda civic on a toy.
I think you made the point, commission painted armies don't usually win because they haven't put the time and effort in some people would painting their own army. Painting your own army will usually be a labour of love. I suppose if they say said army is commission painted and name the artist it's not a problem but if they are claiming they have painted said army and are taking the credit, that's not cool!
I truly hope no one does. But most people that get commission painted armies don't brag about it. They are enthusiastic about the paint job, but don't try to 'flex' on people.
I think it's a no period. The idea was intended for someone to win a prize for the work they have done. It's such a wierd concept to me that you would recive a prize for someone else's work. That's just ridiculous, if you didn't paint it you don't get to compete with people how did.
Depends on situation. I have nerve damage that prevents fine motor skills like holding paintbrush and painting.
I think you put it well. People should be able to enjoy which part of the hobby they enjoy most.
The issue really needs to be decided by the TO in my opinion. If the gameplay and painting are totally separate then it's fine, just exclude the commission pieces on the basis it isn't their own work.
However when the two are combined someone running a commissioned army shouldn't be penalised points, or if there is just a "painted score" they should receive that.
Personally I always think it should be two separate competitions with totally different scoreboards.
Good take. Personally I think anyone with a commissioned Army should just remove themselves from Painting competition, although I agree that they rarely win actual Best Painted. More likely they might win Best Overall.
$2000 for a beautifully painted tournament legal army? Can you send me a link? 😂
hellfirehobbies.com
also this guy: People who buy cars shouldn't be able to win car meet awards. You're paying 2k to the 'french artist' for a reason if you're routinely winning these things. I'd never spend my money there, but let them have this win. Dude just dropped a honda civic on a toy.