PDA

View Full Version : WYSIWYG, how much is enough or too much.



Havock
20-07-2009, 00:37
Asking because I have a certain Vendetta conversion underway with a couple of missiles pairing single-barreled lascannons instead of the very toy-like triple TL-lascannon.
Picture for those who care (http://members.lycos.nl/durandalarw/40k/IG/Luftwaffe/Vendyguns.JPG)

Had some complaints about it from people who are arguably more into the hardliner segment, but what does this glorious democratic thread say about WYSIWYG in general? Or rather, wat do you think is right?

Is WYSIWYG purely there to avoid the "and this guy *random bolterdude* has a powerfist", as well as to make sure it's recognizable?

Or is it really black & white, a fixed rule that should not be deviated from.
Perhaos somehwere in between, or not at all? Enlighten us.

40k Boy
20-07-2009, 00:40
In my group that is exactly how i've been playing my vendetta, and no-one has had a problem with it. I have been trying to build a decent TL-Las from the cannons from the heavy weapons team kits, but still find the single ones look better.

AndrewGPaul
20-07-2009, 00:47
It's basically about letting your opponent see at a glance what's in your army.

Since underwing lascannon aren't a valid codex option for Valkyries, it's clear (to me, at least), that's a vendetta. Arguments to the contrary are liable to be summarily ignored. :)

On the other hand, who cares what this forum says? It's not like you'll end up playing any of them. Ask the folks who you play against - their opinions are more useful to you.

Havock
20-07-2009, 00:52
It's not just my own stuff, it's more of a general discussion about WYSIWYG and how to apply it.

To me: If it looks like what it's meant to be, great.
If you converted something to resemble something else because of 'rule of cool'? Shouldn't be a problem.
Before there were these newfangled 'relic blades', I would definately see a two handed sword 'counting as' a thunder hammer.

Ganymene
20-07-2009, 00:55
I always try to stick to it, but I'm not a wysiwyg nazi.

I am not even sure what Valkyries and Vendettas are armed with. As long as you explained to me what they were equipped with before we started, I would have no problem with it.

Havock
20-07-2009, 00:56
Valkyrie: single multilaser or lascannon with possibly a pair of missiles or rocket pods under the wings.

Vendetta: three twin-linked lascannons.

canucklhead
20-07-2009, 00:58
Here's the thing. The kind of jack*** who will find fault with your conersion, assuming it's still the same basic thing, with a bit of pimping on it, is the same kind of jack*** who is looking for something to gripe about, and will.

You're simply not going to win with someone like this. Build it your way, try to keep it looking like what it was meant to be, and use some colmmong sense.

Things that fly should have parts to show that. Things that shoot should have guns. a chainsword is not a power fist, A bolter is not a lascannon.

Above all else, have a copy of your army list, and make sure it's easy too understand, and ready available for your opponent to have a look at.

Doppleskanger
20-07-2009, 01:25
meh wisiwyg. I mean the point is to not have lots of count as models so your opponent doesn't get unfairly surprised. This is particularly important with unpainted or basecoated armies where it's not obvious at a glance what you're using. So if you want to use it, it better be on the model. That's fair. If it takes a second or two to explain the models, that's fine, as long as things are clear.
An un painted and un wisiwyg ork or chaos army, in particular, can be a nightmare.

Kriegfreak
20-07-2009, 02:15
I like to get pretty close, but I can't stand hardcore wisiwyg, and in most cases its simply to expensive, time consuming, and annoying to try anyways. Most things are so close, that if you 'count as' and you let your opponent know it should be good enough, assuming your not trying to pass off a lasgun as a lass-cannon or something over-the-top.

Vutall
20-07-2009, 02:30
All my Valkyries have Lascannons mounted on the front, even though I use multilasers. They also have both the missile and the rocket pods mounted on them, but they use only the rocket pod. I have a dreadnought who had assault cannons mounted on each of his shoulders, but he uses his powerfist and multimelta. All my space marine tactical sargeanrts have chainswords but are used as power weapons. I find it just looks neat, and then apply rules later..


If someone had a problem with them, I would be fairly upset.

Devon Harmon
20-07-2009, 02:35
I like WYSIWYG but I am okay with substitutions. BY that I mean that I don't care if something counts as something else, as long as it is roughly equivalent, and army wide. I've never sat down and tried to codify where the line is, as far as what I find acceptable, but here are a few examples:
1. I've got a few vintage models that I have no desire to hack up for a conversion. Two of these happen to be space marine scout sgts from Tyranid Attack. They are armed with bolt pistol and chainsword. I like to field them with power swords, so I tell my opponent that they are power swords. Additionally, I will not field ANY OTHER chainswords. My opponent knows that if they see a chainsword, it is a powersword.
2. I don't mind heavy weapons counting as other heavy weapons, as long as there is consistency. I don't want to have to remember which missle launcher is a heavy bolter, which is a lascannon, and which is actually a missle launcher. If every missle launcher = heavy bolter, then that's cool.

I don't really care about non-weapon items at all. No grenades modeled, no problem. No auspex, no problem. No iron halo, no problem.

I'll cut vehicles more slack as well. I don't feel that we should all own each permutation of a vehcile weapon layout in order to play it. But there is a limit to this too. I don't want to have to remember different load-outs on 3 landspeeders that all look identical.

Edit: all of the above is in reference to armies that use guns and stuff. With tyranids, I do not insist that all biomorphs be modeled. First, I do not do so myself. Most people I have played against don't know what the different ones look like anyway. Besides, if you wanted to have a unit of WYSIWYG genestealers with feeder tendrils, you'd have to buy something like 4-5 boxes of those suckers.

I guess what it comes down is confusion. I don't care about wYSIWYG as long as it is not confusing to me or my opponent. This is entirely subjective, I know, but hey, it's how I feel about it. Thanks for asking!

Khornies & milk
20-07-2009, 02:40
Where I can see a problem occurring is when you're playing a pick-up game and your opponent has a 100% WYSIWYG Vendetta, and you have yours....that's where some lively debate might take place. For the record I have the FW kit so the whole issue wouldn't even be raised.

I'm just playing Devil's Advocate...I could care less how far people take WYSIWYG, so long as it's explained beforehand.

As far as WYSIWYG in general...if you do it 100% then you're stopping any issues arising in the first place, so I see it as a good thing.

self biased
20-07-2009, 02:41
so long as you let me know what's what at the start of the game, i'm cool with just about any peculiar substitution you'd be willing to make.

"oh, by the way, this ork nob in mega armor is actually a Marine Terminator with an assault cannon."
"no problem"

"i'm using these serpent models spliced with action figures for my soulgrinders. they're actually bigger than the standard model, and they're based in such a way that the rear armor is bigger than it ought to be, but the sides are shorter. do you mind?"
"dude, anyone who is willing to cut up a dawn and lady death figure for slaaneshi soulgrinders deserves a gold star."

"hey, i'm using the deathwing rules, but my army is actualy Word Bearers First company."
"cool. i see you took advantage of the one sale GW had."

starlight
20-07-2009, 02:54
Confusion = bad

Anything that reduces confusion = good

As long as I can tell by looking at it, and nothing else that looks like it fills a different role, game on. :)

the neckbone
20-07-2009, 03:02
Rule of thunb were i play is if there isnt a model for it (eg vendetta) or you have to buy the same box over and over to get the parts you want (eg sonic blasters for noise marines(and yes i know you can buy em direct but bugger that)) then wysiwyg goes out the window

i refuse to make my army completely wysiwyg untill GW make models and enough options avaible for models

EDIT: much like chaos dreads

MrGiggles
20-07-2009, 03:20
I tend to make all of my models WYSIWYG, but I'm usually fielding 70+ models at a time with my Orks. If you can point to a single model and say 'It has this', you're generally good. Personally though, I just don't want the hassle.

Cry of the Wind
20-07-2009, 03:40
I try to keep WYSIWYG whenever possible but that is not always the case. I only ask that you try to do the same. In your example there that Vendetta looks fine since it is close enough to what it should be. Chainswords as powerswords I'm not as keen on since they have very different effects in game and I might forget even if you tell me at the begining.

My biggest concern is the reason for breaking with WYSIWYG. Do it if you're making a cool conversion that doesn't fit into a proper list entry or if something looks a lot cooler as a result. Don't do it because you are too lazy to find the right bit or too cheap to buy the right model or conversion.

Epicenter
20-07-2009, 04:03
I guess for me, the question of WYSIWYG is about the other person communicating to me that they're not lazy, not cheap, and not out to get advantage via substitution.

I'm a very visual person, and I process the capacity of an army or squad on what I see it armed with. For whatever reason, I find this kind of stupidity most often occurs with Space Marine opponents and their infamous "hidden-hidden Powerfist."

I see a Space Marine Squad, and like all the bolter guys are put together, but the heavy weapons guy has no arms and no backpack. The special weapons guy has no arms. And the Sergeant is some classic figure that does indeed look pretty cool.

Before the game begins, my opponent tells me that he still isn't sure what he's going to arm his guys with, so he's left their arms and backpacks off. And how this heavy weapons guy is armed with a lascannon, this guy with a plasma cannon, these three devs with plasma guns, and so on. Then the same for the special weapons. Then he recites a litany for all six Sergeants in his army that this guy is armed with a plasma pistol, this guy with a power fist and bolt pistol, this guy with a plasma pistol and a power sword, and so on. Of course, these are all classic models so the only thing the models have in common with their wargear is that they're in Power Armor.

By the usual standards of "gentlemanly" conduct, this is all fine and I don't think the guy is trying to cheat or obfuscate anything. I've never caught these opponents actually changing something (or maybe they do and I'm just too dim to catch on).

The problem is that I'll attack something with the assumption that the squad is armed with something else than the powerfist and meltagun it's actually armed with, and my opponent will tell me something like, "Okay, I attack your tank with three powerfist attacks..." "Wait, that guy had a powerfist? I thought he had a powersword...I wouldn't have moved my Rhino there if he had a powerfist." "I told you before the game began."

And he may be right, but it's buried in his subsititution-heavy army where my memory isn't sharp enough to remember what some guy is armed with where I was told it an hour and a half ago. Then it devolves into, "Can you write what your guys are armed with on a sticky note and put it on each figure?" and "What is this guy armed with again?" for the 60th time and the guy starts to answer me with a sigh.

That's just not fun, for either of us.

That's why I prefer WYSIWYG as possible.

Guerillaboy
20-07-2009, 04:17
In big games I try to stick to WYSIWYG, it just makes things easier. If its a pretty simple thing like a naked valkyrie counting as a vendetta or something then yeah thats cool, but if its something way out there I might have a problem with it. Games just with friends I am usually cool with whatever.

Docnoxin
20-07-2009, 04:32
For any pick up game for fun I don't mind being lenient on WYSIWYG. As long as, like others have mentioned if chain sword=power sword then every chain sword in the army needs to be a power sword. I feel it is totally subjective based on confusion reduction. As long as I'm not gonna have to take a quiz later to ensure I understand what your army represents then we are cool.

Now on the other hand, in tournament or even league play I feel that WYSIWYG is a very valuable tool that should be utilized. This being said awesome conversions and fluff can be an exception if done properly, and at least resemble what they represent. Personally I own both ORKs and Marines, two armies that are very important to be strict with WYSIWYG for varying reasons. Marines because they have so many equipment options that being able to instantly go that is a lascannon or powerfist is important. And ORKs because there are so many models that the less confusion there is the better.

Yes I do own 6 dreadnaughts and can field them all uniquely with just about any weapon combination baring a few.

e2055261
20-07-2009, 04:43
I'm ok with it so long as it's not ludicrous. I have a mate who once used a coffee mug to represent a greater demon of khorne - that's a bit silly,though highly amusing.

99% of my stuff is wsiwyg. I find it adds more to the game if your models actually represent what they're supposed to be but if an opponent has a few wargear changes to models i don't have much of a problem. I do the same occasionally.