Proxied models. What's your take?

I actually have an almost unlimited proxy rule, you want to play against me with beastmen but the only thing you have is M&Ms... well the green ones are beastigors and the blue ones are ungors so set them up and prepare to be destroyed (I'm playing ogres and we eat the dead lol).

I very fondly remember playing dozens of games where all I had was cardboard with unit names and numbers written on them, marching across a kitchen table with other cardboard pieces with different terrain written on it. And every game was fun and exciting, trying out every army and build I could ever want to play with all the terrain rules and board placements I could come up with. I would never limit an opponent on a game against me just because he didn't have a model, I prefer clear distinction so I do like cardboard with written names and numbers but I would work with anything as long as it means I can play warhammer.

This of course also opens up to the most competitive play styles as you don't need to pay for the expensive models that are really broken to field them in droves, but that is the way I like to play anyways. Of course now that I have a great job and not as much time to play I have a collection of models probably unrivaled by anyone except GW themselves lol and I do get immense happiness from fielding actual models and playing what you see is what you get.

 

I personally loathe proxies, I think they're a cheap out to actually building up your army slowly. It took me a couple of years to originally build up my very first lizard army, but good god, watching it slowly grow from a ragtag selection of second-hand troops to the strongest army in my area over time as I both added new units slowly and improved my ability over time in tandem was exceptionally rewarding.
Furthermore, I'm a big fan of the notion of supporting the creator. Using proxies so you don't have to buy the models may sound great to you at first, but it does effect GW's income for the worse which is why they have to keep doing a number of the bad practices they do such as raising prices or focusing too heavily on Space Marines because they're the bestsellers and only real source of income. Proxying, to me, is reminiscent of piracy and hurts everyone in the end.
Converted models, however, are perfectly fine to me. There's a real creativity in making a Soul Grinder by removing the legs of a Gorgon and replacing them with Arachnorok legs, or in my case using Green Stuff, Kroot heads, and Carnifex bits to make a Hyrda for use in 8th when I cast Transformation of Kadon.

 

I can forgive it if it's used on a temporary basis like that to choose which to buy, but only a very temporary basis. If you lack the funds to purchase or the artistic skill to convert, don't use it. I went for years not using ideal models because I lacked funds and skill, and all it did was make me a better player because I was forced to learn to rely on tactics and strategy rather than to rely on strong units.

 

I like creative proxying, especially if it involves converting. ("The rocket stands use the rules for repeating bolt throwers; the Chinese dragon the rules for hydra." —said of a Cathayan army using the rules from a DarkElf book. )

I mislike high elf spearmen used as some other army's archers. ("Remember, all these spearmen are archers...")

 

I am good with proxies, usually if there is some effort to make it look like the thing I am fighting. No tetto'eko/starseer? No problem throw a priest on a chair of some sort. No dwarf king? Throw a lord in a chair of some sort. No vermin lord? No problem. Get a bunch of skaven standing on each others shoulders and throw a trench coat on them. As long as it's clearly marked I am okay with the proxy. If you're proxying clan rats as storm vermin, as long as I can tell them apart from your clan rats it's a non issue. Maybe different paint scheme or giant piece of paper on the unit reminding me which is which.

 

That I can accept because it's at least not lazy and some amount of creative effort has gone into it.

 

This is what I did for my first couple games of 8th! When I realized how much I liked the the rule set for that character I decided to pay the money for it! But it is bloody expensive!

 

I think penalizing a player for not having as much money or time as you is a poor way to play a hobby, of course playing with all like minded individuals makes things go smoother, but at the end of the day almost no one actually plays what you see is what you get so arbitrarily inflicting limits on someone else based only on your personal tastes seems off to me. also limiting your playing options does not really make you a better general, just like never learning calculus doesn't make someone a better mathematician, it just means you never played truly competitive games, which is totally fine. I think the difference of views comes down to different priorities within the hobby, my priorities are the game mechanics and playing actual games, whereas others probably value collecting and painting over playing games.

 

I like my games to be competitive but I also like my games to look good. If I want purely competitive game, then I can choose from many board games I have, but WH can and should look good.

Unfortunately my friends buy models more often than me and they persuade me to proxy because they want to play larger games (I like 1500-2000,they like as big as it can be)

 

I don't see it as penalising somebody for not having money. I maintain that the game is not pay to win, give me a budgeted army and I'll beat the snot out of the Skarbrands and Celestant-Primes of the game. Hell, having a limited army like that forces you to get better and to learn how to play creatively and cleverly rather than by just using the models with the best stats, I believe my limited situation in 8th is what led me to becoming a, pardon the brief outpouring of vanity, boss as hell player for AoS. Because I was forced to learn my own creative strategies to win games, when AoS rolled round and tactics became even more powerful than stats I started a winning streak that, to be honest, has not been broken since the game launched. And I play twice a week, every week with some gaps around Christmas because family. And I've done it with strategy rather than expensive models or stats. Hell, I've designed armies much more powerful than mine that I don't have because of a lack of funds, and I still think I could beat those armies if somebody else used them.

In my opinion, proxying like that just promotes tactical laziness.

 

And I would posit that although it may promote tactical laziness, not proxying models guarantees a lack of available tactics and strategy you can learn and use which in the end makes for a lacking of competitive play. You are saying that tactics are superior and I agree, but I find your lack of unit variety and builds strategically lacking and would probably be able to gain victory over you because of that. You may have a long win streak now, but I would suggest it is due to a lack of truly competitive players, I myself had a win streak from 5th edition through 8th, in total I think around 220 games with tournaments included. It was only when my younger brother finally out played me near the end of 8th edition that I suffered my 1st loss in warhammer, and since then he has consistently been able to win about 1/3rd of the games we play, no one else is able to come close to beating me. This is not to sound like a braggart, it is merely to point out that I have focused solely on playing the game instead of collecting, if you have a fun time building and painting a beautiful army then I have fun memorizing every unit in every army and wargaming them in as many matchups as I can. Some people have a great time fielding the best looking army or a theme, I have a great time fielding the absolutely most competitive army I can and beating someone doing the same, and I win by tactics combined with units. But to get to my understanding of tactics and strategy proxying is a must, or I would need full access to GW Eavy metal team models plus some lol

In my opinion not proxying actually promotes tactical laziness, in the same way checkers is easier than chess, the more options you limit the greater your lacking in strategy. I do feel strongly about this but I also want to point out that there is no wrong way to play a hobby, my feelings aside as long as it is fun to each individual then the point has been made.

 

The problem there is that if you have access to every model, you're so much more inclined to just go for the "best build" that you may hear about, see somebody else use, or look up online.

 

Absolutely true, it takes effort to not go with the crowd and to laterally think your way through situations to get to a better solution, just because everyone does it doesn't mean it is the best way, and just because no one does it doesn't mean it isn't great.

 

I made a big rant about this on a thread last year, so I've copy/pasted my thoughts below. I'm primarily a 40k player but my opinions are the same for AoS given that it has such specific differences between weapons and equipment choices.

Arguments for and against this have been done to death with heavy casualties on all sides. For me this breaks down into several different components.

a) Substitution (aka Subbing). In my circle we use the term "subbing" to refer to temporarily using one model or object as another model, either for play testing new lists, units or equipment, or because we haven't completed the actual model. Generally I'm ok with this as long as the person doing the subbing has the intention of fielding the appropriate unit, or if it's only short term (2-3 games). About 5 years back when I started getting back in to the 40k hobby I had friends who were TERRIBLE with subbing. There was an Ork player who would use his actual Ork Boyz as his elites choices and a hodgepodge of my old broken Tyranids and Chaos Space Marines as Ork Boyz, and a variety of old Chaos vehicles as basically whatever Ork vehicle he felt like fielding that day. Another friend from that same group used stock standard Space Marines (also my old models!) as Grey Knights and an egg carton as a landraider (the infamous egg-raider). This was all well and good when we started up, but after a few months it became clear that neither of them had any intent on fielding proper armies which was a massive de-motivator for me having put in the money, time and effort to actually buy, assemble and (mostly) paint my army. To this day subbing leaves a bad taste in my mouth and I refuse to do it myself.

b) Counts-as units Not to be confused with subbing - this is using non-standard models to represent a normal unit on a permanent basis. For example using imperial guardsmen with pulse rifles as Fire Warriors in a Tau army, or in my case a unit of Dark Angels Veterans as Chosen Marines in my Chaos army. This also extends to using non-GW models, such as Mantic's Forgefathers as Space Marines units. In these cases I have absolutely no problem with Counts-as if the unit they're representing is easily identifiable as what they're supposed to be. Lets use my Dark Angels/Chosen as an example - I modelled them with the appropriate equipment for their unit's rules and gave them a few Chaosy bits to differentiate them from normal Dark Angels. I used the Cypher model as their unit champion equipped with bolt pistol, plasma pistol and power sword - a fairly silly combo but one matching the model. This was all pre-dataslates in 5th edition, and nobody questioned it. I think the key is to be reasonable and to not be confusing.

c) Counts-as armies When someone uses a different codex/army book to what their army actually is. The only instances of this I've actually come across is someone who was using the Blood Angels rules for their Chaos Space Marines army, and someone using Grey Knights as Chaos Space Marines, but I have heard of other. This is a massive grey area for me and here's why - motivation. Why are you using rules X for army Y? Is it because you done up a cool Night Lords army back in 3rd edition and you want to represent your super-fast jump pack army using a current ruleset (the Blood Angels example), or is it because a new book came out that is "stronger" than yours and you want to use a better ruleset without investing in the army? The former I can agree with, as long as your primary goal is to have a thematic army. Want a World Eaters army that's a bit more than a Khorne lord and a bunch of Berzerkers? Space Wolves could suit, I'm cool with that. Are your Dark Angels being beaten by Space Wolves so you just appropriate the Space Wolves rules without taking models/background etc into consideration? No, I don't like it.

 

...An egg carton? Really?

 

Yes, the Egg Raiders (yes, plural) became a mainstay of his army. It became very obvious early on that some people I faced had no intention of buying models at all. They had (mostly) legitimate reasons - this is an expensive hobby and for some reason Aussies pay more for... well most things Games Workshop related but rather than scale things back to a managable level they wanted to escalate things to Apocalypse sized games... without any bloody models!

Eventually life got in the way and our little group parted ways but since then some of my other friends have taken up the hobby. Single friends with no children that can afford much more than me, so every battle is different and against actual minis!