Sir Heckington wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Sir Heckington wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Never understood the desire to play smaller games? Bigger the better. 2k is the minimum I will play (except for 1000 point tournaments - those are fun). 2500 point games are the best IMO as you can play more elite armies with command points.

I prefer smaller games like 1k-1250 because every unit means more. I also don't like Elite armies just because the two big ones are Marines and Custodes, both really things I don't like. Not to mention I don't like the idea of those elite armies, and at 1k elite armies still feel elite while other armies can still have individual units matter a lot. Also limits choice, which is fun because you can't take everything you want. Transporting models is also an issue, and the cost of larger games.

The part I don't understand. "it's more fun because you can't take everything you want". To me that is less fun. If both players get to take everything they want it seems like a more fun experience to me. Overpowered units also have more power in smaller games. In smaller tournaments like 750 or 1000 I always just take knights because no army can deal with a knight at those points levels.

I think the point is that we're not out to win, so if someone just takes knights then the other person has no obligation to play. It means you have to spend more time deciding what you want to bring, but also that it will have more influence on the game. We aren't competitive players however, so for me as a Tau player I don't just always take a riptide. Sometimes I'll take a ghostkeel instead, or some broadsides, or even hammerheads! It means I have to make choices instead of just taking everything I have, and those choices means that games are actually different instead of the same two armies facing off against each other ever ytime.