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.

Hey,

I was wondering, what do people prefer to play?
Large games with thousands of points or smaller games with low points?

Every once in a while we hold a small tournament and I was wondering what Dakka thinks of this?
Each size has several advantages and some disadvantages.

So let me know, if you have a preference and why.

Thanks,
Loner

1500.
And Killteams.

I like the 1250pts battles that were playing these days, but w could try 1500 once i finish my dark eldar

I also like the 1000-1500 point range. Enough points to be able to field a real army in any codex, but not so many points that you can just throw in one of everything from your codex and call it a list.

That and the time it takes to play is still very reasonable.

1000-1500 is the most versatile- all Codexes and players can field it.

2000.

I find some codeci really dont let you play with combinations and options until you are at the 2k mark.

For me it just feels like the 2k level lets me bring what I need to and some stuff for fun and/or redundancy.

This is of course assuming I am only playing one game that day. Some people really are slow at certain stages of the game and in 2k this means some games can drag on. Between two efficient players, 2k is golden.

In my area, either 1.5k or 2k is pretty much the only things ever played.

To play 1000 pts is a rarity, only ever done when your army is brand new and being developed.

My favorite is 2000pts.

1500 is where most of the more abuseable armies/units are at their best and where armies are at their most cookie-cutterish. 2000pts allows people to bring pretty much whatever they want, have at least something to cover all the needed bases, and include fun/fluffy units as well.

I feel 2000pts is right in that sweet spot where the stuff that can be abused at 1500pts can be mitigated and countered better, armies are generally more "all comers" and better represented, but still isn't at the point where armies become too big to manage and before the FoC starts to get too restrictive and IG just stomp all over everyone.

I like 1000-1500 best because it makes each point more precious to the player. It makes each unit choice more important without restricting a player to only a few squads on the field like at 750.

I think the FOC works best between 1000 and 1500. More gives restriction to armies with lousy troop options, who have to rely on specialist slots more, and an advantage to armies with excellent troops. Less makes filling the required HQ and troop slots while still having much to spend on fun stuff difficult for some armies.

I like 1000-1500pts a 1000pt game lets you play a fun game fast, 1500pts gives you more choice,and can take an evening if your enjoying a beer with friends.

However, I do feel that certain armies perform better at certain values e.g. orks perform well in lower point games due to cheap basic troops, whereas marines don't have the ability to put down enough models to stay on the board. However in larger games, where more powerful weapons are a lot more common, orks tend to lose effectiveness whereas marines begin to get better because they can put out enough shots to offset the outnumbering.

It's a balance. 500 point games are largely unplayable, as it descends into rock-paper-scissors as no army can field enough units to take on all comers. A 500 point force cannot cover all the bases effectively to stand a real chance against mech and horde lists at the same time. The same problem persists up to about the 1000 points point.

Over 2000, and being stuck with the Force Org Chart really lumbers some codexes, who are forced to take sub-optimal choices to fill out free slots, or take large units which are not worth the points compared to smaller units. Games then are determined by who has the best spread of units (hint: it's the 5th ed dexes)

Between 1000 and 2000 is the sweet spot. It's no surprise that 1500 is generally the standard game size. It has enough variety to ensure the game isn't over before it starts, and it takes a comfortable amount of time to play. My preference is for 1750 points, which allows plenty of variety, but just enough extra points over 1500 to take a few more interesting units or fun pieces or wargear.

Voted for 1501-2000
I think 1500 and 2000 are my favorite, I pay 1500 more often because its quicker and easier to get a game. But I prefer 2000 as it lets you take more interesting toys.

Vaktathi wrote:1500 is where most of the more abuseable armies/units are at their best and where armies are at their most cookie-cutterish. 2000pts allows people to bring pretty much whatever they want, have at least something to cover all the needed bases, and include fun/fluffy units as well.

+1 to this. Lash/CSM and the Ork dex do seem to come into their own around these points levels, as overall you're going to have a larger focus on troop infantry and the 'money units' in heavy/elite/fast slots are expensive and rare.

I like 2,000 because you get to build a true army, with various roles and redundancy built into the list. The 5th ed codices shine a bit because have more options for valuable units in more slots but the number of armies that exhaust all their options and need to take 'filler' units for 2k is shrinking.

1500-2k, with a personal preference for 1750.

Surprised to see all the low-points values suggested. The game seems a lot more balanced around 1750+.

Plus, you bought and painted all those models, why not field more of them?

Depends on so many factors. When me and my bro play its between 2500-3000+ because we both know the rules for our armies well and like to have epic battles. On the opposite side of the scale I have a friend who has just started in 40k so the largest points he can muster at the moment is 400. But both size battles are fun and so I voted "No Preference" :p

That's an interesting notion that you bring up; I've noticed that in truly large games, both sides are generally able to 'win' a chunk of the battle. It also is much harder to maintain cohesive, synergistic forces at extreme points levels (not that 2500 is truly extreme) so you see more units on the table that normally live on the shelf or a couple people teaming up to 'make points'. That makes the large quasi-Apoc style battles more attractive to new players.

1500 I think is the best.

2000+ points allows far to much unit spamming. The game is more interesting and fun when players have to make difficult choices as to what can be taken and what needs to be taken. This also forces players to consider the value of a unit on the battlefield as opposed to "I have 3 of 'em, I can afford to lose one."

I need to change my vote up there but I prefer 1500-2000 while more towards the lower end of that scale.

It's just enough to field a fun army and make it unique. When played on a normal 6'x4' table 1500 points still leaves you with some room to actually maneuver and use some tactics. 2k points is where it starts to be "You set up on that side, I set up on this side, we will both just advance and meet in the middle." If I wanted to do that then I would just go play some WHFB.

Hate to be a troll, but one word: Apocalypse.

Killian wrote:I need to change my vote up there but I prefer 1500-2000 while more towards the lower end of that scale.

It's just enough to field a fun army and make it unique. When played on a normal 6'x4' table 1500 points still leaves you with some room to actually maneuver and use some tactics. 2k points is where it starts to be "You set up on that side, I set up on this side, we will both just advance and meet in the middle." If I wanted to do that then I would just go play some WHFB.

Hahahaha. Seconded.

We normally play 1,500, but I think I would enjoy games with less vehicles more (sorry to get a bit off-topic), which happens more at less points. Then again, I've played 500 pts with a guy in my group and he brought a Leman Russ. I immediately resigned, having nothing to deal with armor 14 (Think best I had were some S7 guns or something...I can't recall).

1500 to 2000, towards the lower end for a more competitive game, towards the higher end for a more fun game. That being said, I enjoy larger games where we jus thave epic huge battles...to me that seems so much more what the 40k universe is all about.

TheRedArmy wrote:
We normally play 1,500, but I think I would enjoy games with less vehicles more (sorry to get a bit off-topic), which happens more at less points. Then again, I've played 500 pts with a guy in my group and he brought a Leman Russ. I immediately resigned, having nothing to deal with armor 14 (Think best I had were some S7 guns or something...I can't recall).

Some entire codices feature no practical way to shoot AV 14. Most armies don't typically care about it either. Unless it's AV 14 all around (which a Leman Russ isn't), there are better ways to deal with it than long distance shooting.

Im glad im not the only player that thinks 1500 pts is plenty for a good battle. I wish I would have known this before I decided to collect a Apocalypse sized BA army. The rest of my army's are only going to be 1500pts though. 2-3 hour game is long enough, not to mention that ive played 5 games now and 3 of them have resulted in ties due to time constraints!

The local tournaments around here are run at 2000pts, and thats what my friends and I usually play. However, I do love some Apoc.

TheRedArmy wrote:

We normally play 1,500, but I think I would enjoy games with less vehicles more (sorry to get a bit off-topic), which happens more at less points. Then again, I've played 500 pts with a guy in my group and he brought a Leman Russ. I immediately resigned, having nothing to deal with armor 14 (Think best I had were some S7 guns or something...I can't recall).

What were you playing? It's entirely possible to deal with a Russ in 500pts, it's not difficult at all actually. They aren't any harder to kill in an assault than anything else, and meltawapons, which you can still generally get a good number of even at 500pts, kill them quickly.

What's way scarier is the guy that brings 4 chimeras.

40k, anything from Kill Teams to 1500pts, at 2000+ my Tau start to run out of things to field that I don't despise, and my Chaos start to lose effectiveness, and i'm not prepared to completely overhaul my army in order to stand a chance at higher levels, shelling out cash for a list i'll rarely even touch is a terrible investment.

Fantasy, anything from 500pts to whatever I have with me.

Either way, his back was never going to leave his edge of deployment and as I said, nothing higher than S7 (no Melta, and I think I was Tau).

It doesn't matter. It was early on in my days (and somewhat early in his), and he thought Vox-casters let you give orders from anywhere on the table.

TheRedArmy wrote:Either way, his back was never going to leave his edge of deployment and as I said, nothing higher than S7 (no Melta, and I think I was Tau).

Eh, there are still ways to deal with something like that, not terribly broken there.

It doesn't matter. It was early on in my days (and somewhat early in his), and he thought Vox-casters let you give orders from anywhere on the table.

A common mistake, it's how one would *think* they'd be used, and how Vox Casters worked with Officer Ld in the previous edition.