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 actually had alot of fun playing a 1000pt match yesterday (using mostly starter set nurgle vs my own chaos cultist list).

I don't think I could ever write a proper list at 1000 pts for 7th.

I kinda miss when 1500 was the standard, which was until 4th I think or maybe a bit after.

Thankfully the average size game is going up. I've been waiting for years for this to happen. I hate small games, I like it when armies look like...armies, not just a handful troops.

My preference is 1500

Brutus_Apex wrote:Thankfully the average size game is going up. I've been waiting for years for this to happen. I hate small games, I like it when armies look like...armies, not just a handful troops.

I've actually been waiting for the opposite. For the rules for 40k to finally support lower model count play as well as Age of Sigmar does.

It's actually kind of amazing that GW may have finally figured out they need to do both. That beginners and people who like more of an RPG approach need the game to work for low model counts and those who like big groups of miniatures and large vehicles, knights, flyers, etc., also need the rules to work for them as well.

 MrMoustaffa wrote:

 gossipmeng wrote:
Just browsing through the army list section it seems like the majority of the lists are aiming for 2000 points - is this what everyone is experiencing in their stores/playgroups as well?

I'm guessing it is largely due to players wanting to keep using the same models from their 7th edition 1650-1850 lists and scaling them to the new point costs. I'm also noticing significantly more 1000 point lists - do you think this is just players testing out the new edition with small armies or will that trend continue as well? I personally wouldn't mind more 1000 point games, with the new rules you could play a few games back to back in an evening.

I really hope not. The whole point of this edition was to make it faster to play. Setting the points at something dumb like 2000pts completely defeats the point of that. Especially tournaments, I was really hoping we'd go back to 1750, 1500 tops.

I'm having a hard time getting a 2000pt army with my IG as is and I have over 200 infantry models to plonk down on the table. I really don't want to have to invest in tanks just to eat up some points because I can't afford the cash to field something stupid like 300 infantry.

Invest in magnetised Movement trays. Since you don't need to worry about coherency anymore you can pack your dudes together.

I always preferred 3000 points back in 2nd edition. 2000 points in 8th is about the same model count as that.

so 2k is good for me.
:}

Debilitate wrote:
Part of me hopes it'll settle on 2500 because I always feel like I'm unable to add one or two things I really want to my lists :((

When I were a lad, 1,000 to 1,500 was a normal game, and 3,000 was apocalypse-scale.

Wtf happened?

2000 points seems about right to me, even at that my army isn't as big as it was at 1500 points in 7th, although that's probably slightly skewed since it's a mechanised list.

That said, I did prefer 1000 points in some ways to 1500 in 7th, the smaller model count gives a lot more space to manoeuvre on a 6x4 table.

My group has been playing at 2000 points as our standard.

We have found an issue however, in that our infantry heavy players all want to move down to 1500, and our non-infantry heavy players all want to go up to 2500.

It's caused a decent amount of contention, especially with the amount of WAAC players in my local.

From what we can determine Infantry heavy players want to go down, because they can still field an incredibly strong force where they lose significantly less than more "elite" armies.

"Elite" army players want to go up, because they're often finding that they're full lists end at something like 1890 (or whatever random, non-2000 number you want) points, and have 100-200 "filler" points they can't jam anything coherent in, so they're just loading with arbitrary points fillers. 2500 seems to let them utilize all the allotted points cohesively.

Who knows how it will turn out, but I'm happy at 2000. It feels like 1500 in 7th.

Clay_Puppington wrote:
From what we can determine Infantry heavy players want to go down, because they can still field an incredibly strong force where they lose significantly less than more "elite" armies.

"Elite" army players want to go up, because they're often finding that they're full lists end at something like 1890 (or whatever random, non-2000 number you want) points, and have 100-200 "filler" points they can't jam anything coherent in, so they're just loading with arbitrary points fillers. 2500 seems to let them utilize all the allotted points cohesively.

I can totally agree with this statement. Elite armies run into a problem of filling out the "requirements" to deal with a range of threats can quickly take you up to 1600+ and than you can only get in 1-2 "toys". Meanwhile horde/cheap armies can easily get the "requirements" at around 800 and have tons of room for the fun stuff.

Take the following two lists that I'd run for Tzeentch, one Daemons and the other Thousand Sons:

Daemons
3 Heralds with Staves for smiting giants
6 Brimstones units for troop slots
3 Units of Flamers for Hordes

This comes to probably (don't have my book right now so memory) ~560 points and it has all the troops I'll need to run anything as well as only using up 3 elite slots out of 5+ that I could have. Compare this to Thousand Sons:

1k Sons
2 Sorcerers
1 Rubric Unit
2 Tzaangor Units
3 Rhinos because the infantry will die easily without

This comes to ~680 and it's really only filling out the HQ/Troop slots and has no horde clearing built in really. The Tzaangors are choppy in melee but the flamers do that better for hordes, the Sorcerers are like the Heralds for smiting so somewhat of a wash there and the Rhinos are taken because there is no way the Tzaangors or Rubrics will survive if they start outside. So for ~120 more points I get less useful stuff while still needing to buy more to make it well rounded. Yes you could argue that the marines are more survivable but a 4++ is probably better than power armor anyhow.

So elites want more so that they can fill the bare bones of a list and get something fun, while hordes want lower because they don't need the extra points as much (secondary effect is that a lower point total would let them be at a greater advantage compared to an elite army because of toys vs not even the bare bones).

2K is a nice clean number. i like it personally

My group has tried 2.5k a few times and its also nice way of bringing the big titanic guns.

I don't think you need to worry what other people are doing. I prefer shorter/more games, so I made my lists at 1500 and that's all I'll be bringing to the FLGS.
IMO it's also more fun to collect a few 1500 point armies rather than one massive 4500p list, though I can see the fun in dramatically changing your list each time if you have a ton of one army.

After a couple editions of being almost entirely out of the game (including selling off my armies), I'm shooting for 1250 right now for my fresh start-- simply because that's what's within reach financially. If they want me to have more, they'll have to buy the models for me

2K is OK when you have time. It tends to bog down a bit and turns can take a long enough time that it feels slow. My friends like 2k so I play it but the games take longer than I'd like