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.

Tomorrow I'm having a 562 point battle with a friend who is new to warhammer, and he only has 562 points of space marines. I had to spend about an hour making my army because of the small points allowance. It was really fun having to budget each unit and choose which models I wanted. This is what I'm going for:

Archon with 5 Trueborn bodyguards
2 Kabalites units with D-Lances and blasters
1 Vinilla raider.

I have always liked small battles, because every model is important and you really have to have a good strategy to win. What do you think about small battles?

I enjoy them more because they take less time to play through. I find that with the people I play with that anything more than 2 hours gets way too tiresome.

Short games are also better for newer players I find.

Personally, I really like them. At one of my friends house his table is only big enough to do a 3.5 x 5 battle so it's always 100, 750, or 500 point games. A quick tailored list gives more time for gaming, a quicker game (but no less fun), and great application for tactics.

That being said I do enjoy larger games. Mixing it up and playing all different point values all the time is great and will help anyone get better at the game.

I definately like them more. Notably though there are some weird 'meta game shifts' that happen to be mindful of. My tau at 500pts can table Necron armies, at 750~1000pts get tabled by the same. Mind you we play non competitive games/lists.

Tau Penetrating Recon Force (~500pts)
Shas'el with Cyclic Ion blaster, Fusion blaster, and Multi-tracker (usually attached to XV-25 team)
Stealth Suit team (three man team, two Burst cannons and one Fusion blaster)
2x Eight man Firewarrior teams
Hammerhead w/ Rail gun

Pros:
-Less time needed
-Less models needed
-Luck plays a bigger factor

Cons:
-Missions are harder with less models
-Some armies scale down better than others. Some can barely do it at all
-Luck plays a bigger factor

I hate small games, as in 500 points and lower:

1) Not enough of an army. I like being able to use any unit in my collection, but once you're done with the mandatory HQ and troops (especially if you want them to be viable units and not just fill FOC slots) you often don't have enough points left to bring, say, a 200 point tank. And you're rarely going to get to bring more than one unit beyond the minimum FOC requirements, which is kind of annoying since it's fun to have a proper mix of units working together.

2) Too much rock/paper/scissors. For example, I can easily bring AV 14 or multiple flyers in a 500 point game, and you're going to have a very hard time coming up with a list that can deal with both of those threats. No matter what you do you're going to have holes in your list, and all you can do is hope that you don't get matched up against the paper to your rock. There's no strategy there, it's just blind guessing and randomly losing games because you spent your 50 remaining points after covering the mandatory HQ/troops on the wrong counter.

 Peregrine wrote:

2) Too much Horde of rocks/AV14 rock/Flying Rock.

With that minor adjustment, I agree.

I won't play anything less than 1000pts, with the exception of kill team based games etc, although they are a different thing altogether.

Typically I play at 1250pts, I find this to be the perfect sized 'small game'.

Anything less than 1000pts doesn't get you enough of anything and can actually hinder you in using half of the things you would like to use, like for my Dark Angels, taking deathwing in less than 1000pts is too risky and generally not worth it, although that can be debatable example, I feel that it can stop you using a large portion of your codex/models which you've paid and painted to use for a reason.

Also as Peregrine has mentioned in his second point, it is very much a rock/paper/scisors excercise, which in general I've never found to be particularly fun, unless you are always the rock paired against the scissors, although it is then not fun for the other player which is something I personally detest, a game should be fun and balanced for both sides, although I'm not competitive so take that with a pinch of salt I guess.

I actually prefer small games of 750 or so sometimes.

Smaller games tend to mean that you don't run into as many WAAClists, as they are all designed for higher points. It also forces you to improvise with what you have, which i like, rather than running the same army-list the same way at every game. YMMV of course

My other preferred pts level is 1850. High enough to have some shiny toys, but too low for double FOC with points to burn....

I don't mind double FOC with some players, but put a WAAC TFG (not always the same thing as competitive player BTW ) in a position where he can spam double the cheese and the game gets less fun for me.

I would have to agree. Although I find low point games fun, I prefer 1500-1800 point games because I can use all my fun toys. Web way portals in low point games are useless, because you don't have enough points to both field troops and keep troops in reserve. I also can't use my talos. I normally field 2 of them with a Haemonculi, but that's over 300 points...

I've been playing 750 points games for the most part of the last three months, and enjoying it. Here's my usual loadout:

Warboss on a bike w/PK, Bosspole, Attack Squig, Cybork
7 Bikers + Nob w/Big Choppa
20 Boys w/shootas + 2 Big shootas
20 Boys w/shootas + 2 Big shootas
Dakkajet w/extra supashoota, fighter ace.

Sometimes I'd switch the dakkajet for two 5-man loota squads and/or the bikers for 4 rokkit koptas. I started bringing the fighter along as a stopgap measure until I had the lootas assembled and painted... I was aware that, playing on a smaller table, It'd only be useful for a couple of turns at best. Still, the sheer horror fliers inspire on my foes has made it worth it - at least one valuable enemy unit will waste its turn taking potshots at it.

In all, I recommend smaller games. Quick, bloody and way more tactical than the long-range exchanges of heavy weapons fire our larger battles had turned to lately...

I find 40k works best for mid-sized games (between 1,000 and 3,000, usually); it gets tedious in Apocalypse-scale unless you have teams, and some armies (Marine armies particularly) don't have a lot of leeway or versatility at too-low points values.

I've found that it largely depends on the armies that you are playing. For the most part, I think almost every codex can start to play an effective game under the current rules at about 750 points. Some dex's can be effective at as few as 500 points (Guard, Orks, Tau, Nids and Necrons are the ones that come to mind) and some are almost crippled at those points levels (Most marine dex's, Eldar, maybe Daemons). However, I do enjoy games in the 750 to 1250 point range for most armies. However, that being said, the optimal balance point for 40k seems to be in the 1500 to 1999 point range.

I used to have three armies that were only used for "Small points" tournaments and games. The smaller, more "tactical" low points games can be very intriguing.

I can see why Games Workshop has shied away from every releasing a true "small points" game, though. They make more money off a 1500-2000 point army than a 500 point one, haha.

 Archon Tobias wrote:
I have always liked small battles, because every model is important and you really have to have a good strategy to win. What do you think about small battles?

Sometimes I like them and sometimes I don't. It is hard to use any of the more interesting units in your army when you have so few points to spend and still need to include the HQ and 2 troops as always in the smaller armies. Sometimes when we do smaller battles we alter the FOC to only require 1 HQ and 1 troops unit to open things up a little more. I far prefer bigger games, though, as I like to have options on the table and use more of my minis in a battle. Only problem is that my regular opponents do not have very large armies these days so it is tough to play really big games with them using their own armies. Often multiple of them will combine their forces to make a larger army to play against one of my armies. Usually it isn't hard to come up with some reason why various armies team up against chaos marines or a chaos daemons incursion.

Edit: If we can get at least 4 players to come out for a game day those 500 point armies are good to enable us to each play multiple games against multiple opponents side by side on the same table. 4x4 is a good size for a 500 point game. This is also why we've played a lot of necromunda through the years, because we can have 2 regular battles happening on the main table, and people are doing little shootouts and gang maintenance and upkeep on smaller side tables. Keeps everyone occupied and involved instead of everyone just waiting for the big table to clear for the next game.

Skriker

I also like small point games. They seem a lot more strategic. Large games tend to have the feeling of just throwing a ton of stuff on the table, and rolling dice.

With smaller games, you have to make meaningful choices with your army list, and you have low enough numbers that you have to actually care about casualties, and who is going to achieve what objective. Without a deployment zone crammed full of crap, and generally without long-range support, movement becomes a much bigger deal.

I'd play the battleforce recon mission from the back of the rulebook. That works pretty well for 500 point games. I've also played 250 point games with said mission with the "suicide squads" special rule. It was pretty neat, actually. 40k rules collapse down to the skirmish level surprisingly well.

Of course, larger games have their place too, what with all the cool stuff you get to bring, but smaller ones do as well.

And, as mentioned, they take a lot less time to play...

I enjoy them.
However if one squad rolls poorly, it can really affect the whole game. In larger points games, one squad fluffs? No matter, I've got 2 more of those to make up for it.

I hate small battles. I have lots of models and the more I can use in one game the better. Its simple value for money. The same is also true for GW Hobby Centre Apocalypse games where is 20 odd people with "An HQ, Troop and ""something AWESOME!!!! """"

 Ailaros wrote:
I also like small point games. They seem a lot more strategic. Large games tend to have the feeling of just throwing a ton of stuff on the table, and rolling dice.

With smaller games, you have to make meaningful choices with your army list, and you have low enough numbers that you have to actually care about casualties, and who is going to achieve what objective. Without a deployment zone crammed full of crap, and generally without long-range support, movement becomes a much bigger deal.

I'd play the battleforce recon mission from the back of the rulebook. That works pretty well for 500 point games. I've also played 250 point games with said mission with the "suicide squads" special rule. It was pretty neat, actually. 40k rules collapse down to the skirmish level surprisingly well.

Of course, larger games have their place too, what with all the cool stuff you get to bring, but smaller ones do as well.

And, as mentioned, they take a lot less time to play...

This is what I like about small games. Although I don't get my big, make my opponent crap themselves, has more upgrades than the rest of my army, models, I find that since the game doesn't drag on for hours, with nether player making leeway, it's more exciting.

They have their benefits. They play differently from bigger matches. But that's not always a good thing. One single bad roll can result in a catastrophe much more easily than in a larger game.

Balance is also quite different, as others have mentioned. With a fun list it's fine, but if someone wants to be an ass, it's probably even easier in a small match than a large one. A Deathwing contingent vs a full on Ork shoota boy onslaught? Nasty times.

There is a small game type that me and a few others really enjoy playing.

750 pts

1 foot shorter board.

FOC is restricted to one heavy OR one elite OR one fast attack.

and the mandatory 1 HQ 2 troops.

It really prevents anyone from spamming to much of anything but still being able to play or bring whatever feel you want to your army.

 Peregrine wrote:
I hate small games, as in 500 points and lower:

1) Not enough of an army. I like being able to use any unit in my collection, but once you're done with the mandatory HQ and troops (especially if you want them to be viable units and not just fill FOC slots) you often don't have enough points left to bring, say, a 200 point tank. And you're rarely going to get to bring more than one unit beyond the minimum FOC requirements, which is kind of annoying since it's fun to have a proper mix of units working together.

2) Too much rock/paper/scissors. For example, I can easily bring AV 14 or multiple flyers in a 500 point game, and you're going to have a very hard time coming up with a list that can deal with both of those threats. No matter what you do you're going to have holes in your list, and all you can do is hope that you don't get matched up against the paper to your rock. There's no strategy there, it's just blind guessing and randomly losing games because you spent your 50 remaining points after covering the mandatory HQ/troops on the wrong counter.

I'm with Peregrine on this one. I do like small games, but I don't like being able to field only a few things. That and the problem with dealing with armor.

Perhaps with a bit of work you could make a special scenario work with it. Like battling through a building using those tile mold kits that are pretty snazz. Simply put, you can't really use vehicles because they won't be able to fit inside. Good for beginner games, but if you ever intend to play the game in any sort of serious light practicing without vehicles is not the way to go, lol.

 Peregrine wrote:


2) Too much rock/paper/scissors. For example, I can easily bring AV 14 or multiple flyers in a 500 point game, and you're going to have a very hard time coming up with a list that can deal with both of those threats. No matter what you do you're going to have holes in your list, and all you can do is hope that you don't get matched up against the paper to your rock. There's no strategy there, it's just blind guessing and randomly losing games because you spent your 50 remaining points after covering the mandatory HQ/troops on the wrong counter.

if you bring something like a LR or any AV14 tank to a game that small you really need to re-think your list. any army with a melta, rail or lance gun will have it out of the game in a flash and thats a good chunk of your army gone.

I would also have to argue strongly that it's just blind guessing. if anything it forces you to make an all comers list and really think about your army and what you can or can't take to stop you from ever getting into the rock paper scissors problem

Are they more fun is your premise.

Than? Larger ones?

depends on how you want to play, who you play and what environment you play in.

I love 1k-1.5k myself but others will tell you its limiting and constricting.

But larger games can become a zerg.

All about , what you want/who you play

 DPBellathrom wrote:
if you bring something like a LR or any AV14 tank to a game that small you really need to re-think your list. any army with a melta, rail or lance gun will have it out of the game in a flash and thats a good chunk of your army gone.

Except the list that brings melta is going to be weak against the lists with no vehicles (since they can't bring any anti-infantry weapons) so it's all rock/paper/scissors. Meanwhile even if the other player does have a melta gun that's still only one anti-tank weapon, you need more than that to consistently deal with AV 14 and many 500 point armies simply can't bring it. AV 14 might not be 100% invulnerable, but it certainly wins a lot of 500 point games before any models are even deployed.

I would also have to argue strongly that it's just blind guessing. if anything it forces you to make an all comers list and really think about your army and what you can or can't take to stop you from ever getting into the rock paper scissors problem

The point is that you can't make an all-comers list in a 500 point game. No army is capable of covering all possible threats (at least with any hope of dealing with them, "shoot bolters into rear armor" is not valid AA, for example) so you have to pick one or two potential threats and hope you don't end up fighting the ones you didn't pick.

I've played against people who bring fliers at low points games and have beaten them handily. You can't spend enough points on troops to be competitive at this point level if you're throwing over half your points after non-scoring toy units.

 Ailaros wrote:
I've played against people who bring fliers at low points games and have beaten them handily. You can't spend enough points on troops to be competitive at this point level if you're throwing over half your points after non-scoring toy units.

Err, what? It's a 500 point game, and most flyers are well under 250 points. So how is that "over half"?

Not that it really matters anyway, since the easiest way to win a 500 point game is to just table your opponent. With so few units involved you can pretty quickly reach a point where objectives and scoring are irrelevant.

People should just play the old Combat Patrol variant from 4th edition, which is basically the 40K in 40 minutes.

 AegisGrimm wrote:
People should just play the old Combat Patrol variant from 4th edition, which is basically the 40K in 40 minutes.

500 point games in general shouldn't take 50+ minutes.

Gotta admit, it really depends on the skill and luck of players.

500 point games- My Chaos Daemons either struggle, or shine like there's no tomarrow! But against my friends IG list, I havn't a hope in hell of winning