Author |
Message |
 |
|
 |
Advert
|
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. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/02/12 00:59:44
Subject: What do you think is the "best" points level for a game?
|
 |
Skillful Swordmaster
|
Just wondering what most folk consider to be the ideal points level for a game of 40k.
Personally I like 1500-1750 region as It lets me a decent amount of models on the board without taking to long to fight the battle but I am curious as to what other people think.
|
Damn I cant wait to the GW legal team codex comes out now there is a dex that will conquer all. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/02/12 01:01:40
Subject: What do you think is the "best" points level for a game?
|
 |
Malicious Mandrake
|
Personally, I really enjoy games at 1k.
Just something about the tightness of the pts value, the emphasis on the player to make cost-effective selections, and the intensity of every turn makes the game really enjoyable for me...
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/02/12 01:15:16
Subject: What do you think is the "best" points level for a game?
|
 |
Plummeting Black Templar Thunderhawk Pilot
|
We really vary at our FLGS. When we play tournies, its 1500 strictly, but when we just play for fun, its often 2000. When Gt's come up though, we always practice our 1500 lists, and 500 doubles for conflict.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/02/12 01:23:04
Subject: What do you think is the "best" points level for a game?
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
Mesopotamia. The Kingdom Where we Secretly Reign.
|
I like 1850-2000, going bigger when I have the time.
|
Drink deeply and lustily from the foamy draught of evil.
W: 1.756 Quadrillion L: 0 D: 2
Haters gon' hate. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/02/12 01:25:41
Subject: What do you think is the "best" points level for a game?
|
 |
Plummeting Black Templar Thunderhawk Pilot
|
Bigger is fun for friendlies, its just way more epic in scale. I try to keep my friendlies at high cost - I do enough list trimming at tournaments!
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/02/12 01:30:37
Subject: What do you think is the "best" points level for a game?
|
 |
Combat Jumping Ragik
|
2k is my favortie. I feel it allows armies to fill out their FoC so you see all elements of an army in play. Rather then smaller games were people take w/e is the most efficient for their army. Not to say this doesn't happen in 2k just 2k tends to have more variety imo.
|
Trade rules: lower rep trades ships 1st. - I ship within 2 business days, if it will be longer I will contact you & explain. - I will NOT lie on customs forms, it's a felony, do not ask me to mark sales as "gifts". Free shipping applies to contiguous US states. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/02/12 01:43:05
Subject: What do you think is the "best" points level for a game?
|
 |
Insect-Infested Nurgle Chaos Lord
|
400 combat patrol. The restrictions means that you'll never be gimped into facing something you cannot actually destroy, so you always stand a chance at winning until literally the last man falls. The fast pace of the game also allows for more than a few during the day, meaning more fun. Plus, the smaller points and other restrictions really make each and every point count, whereas you can feasably loose 250 points worth in the opening phases of a 1k battle and still be relatively ok.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/02/12 01:52:27
Gwar! wrote:Huh, I had no idea Graham McNeillm Dav Torpe and Pete Haines posted on Dakka. Hi Graham McNeillm Dav Torpe and Pete Haines!!!!!!!!!!!!! Can I have an Autograph!
Kanluwen wrote:
Hell, I'm not that bothered by the Stormraven. Why? Because, as it stands right now, it's "limited use".When it's shoehorned in to the Codex: Space Marines, then yeah. I'll be irked.
When I'm editing alot, you know I have a gakload of homework to (not) do. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/02/12 01:44:46
Subject: What do you think is the "best" points level for a game?
|
 |
Plummeting Black Templar Thunderhawk Pilot
|
Thats actually the one negative point when playing 3k or above - if the player going first has a shed-load of guns, then well over a third of the opponents forces can go down turn one - not fun for that player...
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/02/12 01:53:32
Subject: Re:What do you think is the "best" points level for a game?
|
 |
Infiltrating Broodlord
|
The game is balanced at 1500, so that is my favorite.
Anything lower or higher, and 1) Army power becomes skewed too much and 2) lists become less intelligent as people just mindlessly spam garbage.
|
Ayn Rand "We can evade reality, but we cannot evade the consequences of evading reality" |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/02/12 02:55:40
Subject: What do you think is the "best" points level for a game?
|
 |
Junior Officer with Laspistol
University of St. Andrews
|
I prefer games at 2000 points. It's large enough for epic things to happen, while at the same time not ridiculous in scale. I like to think that 2000 ponint is big enough for players to get what they want, while still having to be cautious with what they bring.
|
"If everything on Earth were rational, nothing would ever happen."
~Fyodor Dostoevsky
"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."
~Hanlon's Razor
707th Lubyan Aquila Banner Motor Rifle Regiment (6000 pts)
Battlefleet Tomania (2500 pts)
Visit my nation on Nation States!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/02/12 02:57:47
Subject: Re:What do you think is the "best" points level for a game?
|
 |
Veteran ORC
|
I prefer 1000 pts, honestly. Short, sweet, and simple.
|
I've never feared Death or Dying. I've only feared never Trying. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/02/12 02:58:43
Subject: What do you think is the "best" points level for a game?
|
 |
Norn Queen
|
1500. It's got the same tight feeling as a 1000 point game, but also letting you bring a bigger toy or two.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/02/12 03:01:51
Subject: What do you think is the "best" points level for a game?
|
 |
Skillful Swordmaster
|
Just a point most aussies seem to prefer smaller games while the yanks prefer bigger games I wonder why that is?
|
Damn I cant wait to the GW legal team codex comes out now there is a dex that will conquer all. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/02/12 03:02:58
Subject: What do you think is the "best" points level for a game?
|
 |
Junior Officer with Laspistol
University of St. Andrews
|
It's absolutely not a Freudian reason if that's what you're thinking.
|
"If everything on Earth were rational, nothing would ever happen."
~Fyodor Dostoevsky
"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."
~Hanlon's Razor
707th Lubyan Aquila Banner Motor Rifle Regiment (6000 pts)
Battlefleet Tomania (2500 pts)
Visit my nation on Nation States!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/02/12 03:09:17
Subject: What do you think is the "best" points level for a game?
|
 |
Norn Queen
|
I mainly prefer smaller games because 40k is balanced towards a 1500 point limit. That's why armies tend to get crazy broken at higher point levels - they're not balanced for it.
While GW could balance for higher points levels, they don't.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/02/12 03:16:49
Subject: What do you think is the "best" points level for a game?
|
 |
Skillful Swordmaster
|
ChrisWWII wrote:It's absolutely not a Freudian reason if that's what you're thinking.
lolz =) I was thinking economical reason since the hobby is even more expensive for aussies between shipping charges and a higher ticket price on local stuff
|
Damn I cant wait to the GW legal team codex comes out now there is a dex that will conquer all. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/02/12 03:18:53
Subject: What do you think is the "best" points level for a game?
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
Mesopotamia. The Kingdom Where we Secretly Reign.
|
I thought the Aussies played smaller games because they don't have time to finish a bigger one before the Drop Bears attack.
|
Drink deeply and lustily from the foamy draught of evil.
W: 1.756 Quadrillion L: 0 D: 2
Haters gon' hate. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/02/12 03:30:57
Subject: Re:What do you think is the "best" points level for a game?
|
 |
Impassive Inquisitorial Interrogator
|
Between 1500 and 2000.
1500
Pros: Forces you to make tough choices. Can often make for fun, faster games.
Cons: Easily broken by spam builds (i.e. 3 Land Raiders)
1750:
Pros: Not too huge to manage, and you can fit in most of the units that you really want to. You can fill up the Force Org chart with some armies, and you don't need to with others.
Cons: Sometimes you just like a larger game!
2000:
Pros: Can bring plenty of toys to the table, while still preventing maxing out on all the best selections.
Cons: Starts to get into the area where obscene Deathstars can roll a more well balanced list.
One thing that I've noticed across the board is that, the higher you go in points, the less forgiving poor list design is. At 1500, you can probably get away with not bring enough anti-tank. At 2000, if you lack substantial anti-tank, you are, in a word, screwed.
|
"Don't put your trust in revolutions. They always come around again. That's why they're called revolutions. People die, and nothing changes."
In the grim darkness of the 41st millenium... there is only brand loyalty! |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/02/12 03:35:25
Subject: What do you think is the "best" points level for a game?
|
 |
Skillful Swordmaster
|
Monster Rain wrote:I thought the Aussies played smaller games because they don't have time to finish a bigger one before the Drop Bears attack.
lolz "thats not a chainsword, now this is a chainsword"
Yeah but those drop bears are a menace good thing all aussie men are manly men =)
|
Damn I cant wait to the GW legal team codex comes out now there is a dex that will conquer all. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/02/12 03:38:45
Subject: Re:What do you think is the "best" points level for a game?
|
 |
Raging Ravener
|
1500-1750.
I do need to occasionally take a break and play 500-1000. Some of my favorite memories are 1,000 point games. But 1500-1750 gives you some room but not a ton.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/02/12 03:59:15
Subject: What do you think is the "best" points level for a game?
|
 |
Lone Wolf Sentinel Pilot
|
I like 1500. Good length, big enough to bring what you want, small enough to have to make some tough choices.
So you can bring that one land raider, but not 3 of them (well you COULD but it wouldn't be a good idea).
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/02/12 05:42:13
Subject: What do you think is the "best" points level for a game?
|
 |
Widowmaker
Perth, WA, australia
|
500-1500
I don't exactly like the above point , it got dragged on and on and on
|
So far
500 point of
750 point of
500 point
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/02/12 07:38:00
Subject: Re:What do you think is the "best" points level for a game?
|
 |
Twisted Trueborn with Blaster
|
1,000-1,500.
At 1,000, it seems to gimp the IG vehicle/ordinance spam that my friend likes to do, however, my anti-tank is not gimped.
At 1,500, like has been said, tough choices, but you can bring a bigger toy or two, I like that.
However, some Killteam here and there really helps breaking it up too. I love to play objectives, but no one else around here really does, that's a bummer to me.
|
Kingdom Death Fanatic. Dark Eldar: Kabal of the Fragile Breath. Dark Elves: Allegiance to the Black Crown. Also, Masons, Cygnar, and Legion of Everblight. All unnamed.
Manchu wrote:The Fragile Breath wrote: . . . something but I was distracted by the username.
Holy gak that is an awesome username. Please tell me your army is called Kabal of the Fragile Breath. Morathi's Darkest Sin has some competition here for best handle, I think. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/02/12 07:47:37
Subject: What do you think is the "best" points level for a game?
|
 |
Calculating Commissar
|
500-1750
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/02/12 07:54:49
Subject: What do you think is the "best" points level for a game?
|
 |
Renegade Inquisitor with a Bound Daemon
Tied and gagged in the back of your car
|
1500 for basic games. You can have a few really neat toys while still having to be mindful of what actually goes into the list.
For team games, 1000-1250 is good. It makes you have to really consider team synergy for best results.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/02/12 08:49:03
Subject: What do you think is the "best" points level for a game?
|
 |
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter
Australia (Recently ravaged by the Hive Fleet Ginger Overlord)
|
I prefer 1000pts, though since I've moved down to brissy 1500-1750 seems to be the standard.
|
Smacks wrote:
After the game, pack up all your miniatures, then slap the guy next to you on the ass and say.
"Good game guys, now lets hit the showers" |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/02/12 08:58:55
Subject: What do you think is the "best" points level for a game?
|
 |
[MOD]
Anti-piracy Officer
Somewhere in south-central England.
|
I think it works well at anything from 1,000 to 2,000 points.
Under 1,000 and some armies start to be very badly compromised by lack of selections.
Over 2,000 and having all the toys plus the problem of UGOIGO becomes extreme.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/02/12 09:11:33
Subject: What do you think is the "best" points level for a game?
|
 |
Devestating Grey Knight Dreadknight
|
-Loki- wrote:1500. It's got the same tight feeling as a 1000 point game, but also letting you bring a bigger toy or two.
Why did I find that sexual? Automatically Appended Next Post: Kilkrazy wrote:I think it works well at anything from 1,000 to 2,000 points.
Under 1,000 and some armies start to be very badly compromised by lack of selections.
Over 2,000 and having all the toys plus the problem of UGOIGO becomes extreme.
What is UGOIGO?
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/02/12 09:12:29
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/02/12 09:35:03
Subject: What do you think is the "best" points level for a game?
|
 |
Powerful Chaos Warrior
|
UGOIGO:
You take your full turn, moving, shooting, assaulting.
I take my full turn, moving, shooting, assaulting.
You go, I go.
It's kind of old design as far as wargames go, but then 40k is a legacy game. The only change I really want in sixth edition is to scrap UGOIGO and move to a "model activation" scheme: I activate one of my models/units, do his full move/shoot/assault, then you choose one of yours, and do the same thing, then I go again, and so on and so on. It's a lot more dynamic.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/02/12 09:36:00
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/02/12 09:44:23
Subject: What do you think is the "best" points level for a game?
|
 |
Daring Dark Eldar Raider Rider
|
It would be more complicated though.
Back on topic, 1,000 for me, mostly because I can't field enough models for higher point games.
|
|
 |
 |
|