as explained before bara, he maybe an objective, but he is not a marker.

you could however make a marker to mark the warlord.

a sign post saying '' Warlord that way''

with a skeletal hand pointing in the general direction of him

Maybe a sign saying "Kick Me" taped to his back?

curses! i was saving that for you!

Well, it's been done before!



So there's your basic warlord with a "kick me" sign on his back!

the vaguely decent part of me refuses to laugh at that picture

but the other 98% of me is wetting itself!

Fortunately, that particular warlord got more than a kick.

Amen!

So starting to think ahead to objective markers - is there a base size we r going for? Is it ok to include minis? Incidentally I wonder do we really need 2 lots of objective markers in the comp list this year? Speaking for myself I made 5 the last time we did a comp on the site for those. Doing two lots in the next few months seems like work I really don't need to do lol: perhaps the July one could be swapped for a different idea? Say - 'diorama'' or 'duel?'

well, i've been having the same thoughts for the last few days to be perfectly honest

will talk it over with TW next time i see him on skype, but im thinking of just opening it to Objective (markers included) pieces

gives a little more free reign, from a downed trooper you need to get to or a full blown tower block you need to raze



will update this as needed

or maybe we could have a totally different category, like:

- A gaming HQ unit, consisting on nothing less than 5 models.
- A gaming squadron of vehicles, nothing less than 3 models.
- Maybe if we knew something was coming up in advance, and we could submit entries between now and then, a whole army...

This type of category helps us do more painting and multiple models.

KInG wrote:or maybe we could have a totally different category, like:

- A gaming HQ unit, consisting on nothing less than 5 models.
- A gaming squadron of vehicles, nothing less than 3 models.
- Maybe if we knew something was coming up in advance, and we could submit entries between now and then, a whole army...

This type of category helps us do more painting and multiple models.

Agreed - for me it's about more variety than just anther objective marker.

Talus and I have been talking about this.

We're going to be changing up the line up a bit, trying to get rid of some of the duplicates.

We wanted to have something that everyone could enter at one point or another. We're working on the objective markers right now. Thinking of making it an objective or an objective marker. We are just trying to figure out how to word it. We don't want someone entering a huge building or piece of terrain saying it's an objective, plus those items will be the subject of future competitions.

But as for February, if it's an objective/objective marker competition, it pretty much opens the door a little wider. Someone could, for example, do a model of a warlord saying that killing him is an objective, but I wouldn't want to see someone do up a platoon of troops saying killing any one of them would give the first blood objective.

Hopefully the entrants will stay within the intent of the competition as well. And the event moderators will be keeping a close eye on the entries as well. Just understand that if we think an entry is too far off the mark, and disqualify it, it's not meant as malicious or personal, it's just simply a mod action, nothing more, nothing less.

we know that I hope TW, we wouldn't hold it against you. I do have your address though, something I just wanted you to know

I would like to see model building come in more as that would play to my strengths. I know others here are also more into that than painting. So these could be used to involve a wider audience also. conversions and scratch builds could be the main theme and painting a secondary requirement. Obviously a good paint job will help any piece, but if the conversion is the theme people can look past that a bit.

Yeah, a unit comp would be interesting though I hope it isn't too restrictive.

EDIT: I wasn't serious with the warlord suggestion, but since it was getting fairly technical I was just pointing out one of the gaps. TBH I think you should just have a judge's decision on whether individual requests are acceptable