Like Skink said, close enough that if two squads are painted with the 'equivalent' paints, most casual observers won't notice and most people won't care. In contrast, Vallejo Game Color is very close to Old Citadel close enough that you can substitute for most of the colors that matter in New Citadel. But many of the P3 paints that aren't basic palette colors don't look anything like any paint that Citadel or Vallejo have ever made. There are a few colors that are a sort of close. The pots, however, are just like FW pots and the same as GW pots were 25 years ago Putting colors aside, the formula and behavior (consistency, coverage, drying time, way it dries, way it interacts with mediums, glossiness, etc.) is not the same at all. I'm sorry man, not to sound harsh, but P3 paints are nothing like the Old Citadel range :X though as always need to attach the disclaimer that matches are RARELY exact, they usually just put you in the ballpark (maybe close enough that you can translate a painting tutorial from one range to another, usually not close enough that you can replace a colour in your army without noticing). The Vallejo chart is probably the most comprehensive, especially if you're looking for Vallejo paints. The Dakka chart just tries to get matches for Citadel colours, so even of the ranges it does cover there's a lot of individual paints it misses because of that. Just because you disagree with some of the equivalencies that the author chose doesn't make the chart 'useless' or 'outdated'.No, what makes it useless and outdated is if you want to find a equivalent for a range or specific paint that it doesn't cover. Its always been a matter of opinion on whether color X or color Y is a close enough match to color Z to be considered an equivalent.
Ghaz wrote: Last time I looked, there wasn't a scientifically approved method for determining paint equivalents.
0 kommentar(er)
