Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I voted 1750, just because we vary between 1500 and 2k.

5000, because I like fielding billions of models!
But for nice compact games, anywhere from 1500 to 2000

I like playing Apoc, but failing that I'm happiest with smaller games up to 1500 pts.

IMO, 1750, 1850+ are just too big for 1v1 duels.

I believe that the best are tag team battles 2 vs. 2 1000 pts to a player or 2000pts to a side.

I just like pitting single units against each other.

Like wunov da boyz against a dreadnought.

Demogerg wrote:i like massive games that you could write a book about.
10 players bringing 10k points each yeeeeaaa!

QFT

I like a range of games . . . campaigns with growing points are cool, but 1500 is definitely my favourite.

YUK I can't believe that many people like 1500. I hate that number. 2000 is just so much better.

I voted 1850

I don't mind but i prefer 1500 pts painted than 3000 just undercovered

2000. You can field a really well-rounded army, have a couple of fun units, and 1 or 2 bad dice rolls won't lose you the game. I don't play anything under 1500 as a general rule. If I'm going to go through the hassle of setting up, I want some strategy and tactics involved. Anything under 1000 is determined entirely by a couple dice rolls or an army list. Between 1000 and 1500 tactics start to come into play. When you get to 2000 you really have to think about what you're going to shoot first, where you need to assault or avoid assault, etc. Much more emphasis on strategy than dice rolls or cheesing out an army list. I'm not bitter about getting owned in small point battles. I was the jerk who put a Looted Leman Russ into a 500 point game back in 4th edition. I just didn't think it was fair for me to kill their only Lascannon on the first shot of the game and win by default.

This poll needs a 1250 option. 1250 games are my favorite as they are played like 1000 point games, but still allow room for more tactical flexibility, and if nothing else, some fun extra units.

1500 point's I can field all my favorite unit's. :3

No choice for 500Pts I vote 1000Pts.

oggers wrote:No choice for 500Pts I vote 1000Pts.

500? Now that is an interesting choice, Personally I hate 500 point games, they go by so quick, you can't even get into it before the game is over, not to mention it allows little to none tactical flexibility. It always seems like 500 point games are solely based around dice rolls rather than overall strategy, either that or it comes down to who has the better army to play a 500 point game.

Seeing as this is your favorite point value you must have some interesting tactics set up for these games, I would love to hear them.

I prefer 2,000. I'll go as low as 1,000, but no lower.

At the FLGS I go to, they try to limit games to 1000 pts. I would prefer 1500 pts, but I dont think anyone in my groups (including myself) has that many models yet.

1000 pts.
Nice, not many powerbuilds (thoug I can't get my Land Raider and Assault Termies, sad face), takes short enough time despite still being tactical enough

I like 2K, but wish my store played more than that and 1850.

1000 pts, all ways have, all ways will

1500, looking to change it up to 2000 eventually. 1000 is good as well, I keep a couple lists for 1000 and 1500 so I don't have to waste too much time if I'm going to play a different point level. Generally if it's going to be 500, might as well just play kill teams instead, it's good that it returned.

3 points is a great game, 1 Gretchin per side.

1750 pts is like 1500 pts with that little extra nudge, you can afford to put in that extra unit you like or just for the fluff. 250 pts don´t make the gameingtime that much longer than a 1500 pts game either.

I'm gonna be in a minority for liking 1k games, and since that's what I play the most, that's what I voted for. However, 1500 games seem to have a lot more depth for me; I'm hoping to get in more 1.5k games soon.

I think I play 1500 and 2000 the most.

Though I hear about these 1750/1850 games coming about..

who decides what's 'IN' for points these days?!

I prefer 1500 to 1750 because whenever I'm playing Orks or IG , I can atleast get in 2 games , sometimes 3 when I play on Saturdays or Sundays .

2000 points; Gives the armies some size, allows for versatile tactics, and lets the game evolve rather than end when an important unit dies.

i prefer 1500. its clearly laid out, but enough for more tactics...
i dont like games with a playtime more than 2-3 hours.

1500. Not too big, not too small. Just right, says Goldilocks.

I found 1250 good for a shorter game but it requred me to pick more carefully of what I needed and not what I wanted. At 1500 I didn't have a decent army with extra points to fill with something and my army was unbalanced. At 1850 I have a good size army with some upgrades and the play time wasn't much longer then at 1250.