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 have just finished my newest gaming table for my home, and have decided on a 4x4 for the gaming surface.

I have played on a 4x4 a 4x6 and a 4x8 and found I enjoyed the 4x4 most of all.

While I enjoy a 4x6 as well, I find that 90% of the time our battles take place in a 4x4 square, many time much smaller than that as I play BA and Orks and am in their face pretty early on.

Soooo, as the title says, what would you prefer?

4x4.

I wouldn't play anything larger than 500 points on 4x4.

It's too small to accommodate a larger game.

Hmmmm... by that logic you wouldn't play anything larger than 750 on a 4x6?

As a BA player it isn't any fun anymore playing 4x4, much more fun to have to actually take a few turns to catch or corner the enemy.

For me, any game equal to or less than 1k is on a 4ft by 4ft.

I like 4ft by 4ft; makes running away and camping less of a 'no-brainer' tactic. Also makes outflanking much more viable.

I like playing on 4 x 6 battle field on a 4 x 8 table. That way there is place to stick my stuff off the battle field.

Connor McKane wrote:Hmmmm... by that logic you wouldn't play anything larger than 750 on a 4x6?

Not quite, in 2000p games people usually do not have 4x as many models as 500 as they take more elite units, but I think you could play 750p or maybe 1000p on 4x4.

I would disagree, we played a couple of 2K games on a 4x4 and didn't have any trouble at all.

4X6

If none of your opponents play shooting armies it should be a non-issue.

If you are playing BA vs IG on a small table, I doubt the IG player will appreciate how it allows you to "be in their face" a turn or two faster.

/shrug

4x6 because the rulebook sez thats the size you play on.

Connor McKane wrote:I would disagree, we played a couple of 2K games on a 4x4 and didn't have any trouble at all.

I'm assuming said game was Deathwing vs. Draigo + Paladins? I can't imagine playing 2000 on 4x4 comfortably. I played an 1850 tournament on 4x4 and it was kind of miserable with my IG.

I like 4x6 because it actually has room to maneuver. If I'm playing a game under 1000 points a 4x4 table is fine though.

Most people do not have the luxury for a 4x6 table as they live in small apartments/dwellings/etc. 4x4 tables are easy to build and easy to put away and do not take a lot of area space in a room to game. Back in 4th ED 1500 points or lower was the norm for a 4x4 table in my region. Not sure what it is now, but I can still play a 1500 point on that size of table.

Learn your games on a 4x4 table with your armies before going up to a 4x6 (or larger).

For myself it is a 4x4 table for it is easy to play it anywhere in my living room or my bed room.

I recently go the Boards to fill out a 4x6 table, and as a necron player, i'm seeing great improvement in play because of it. The extra room helps with flanking a destroyer wing and easier to keep units alive.

Adam LongWalker wrote:Learn your games on a 4x4 table with your armies before going up to a 4x6 (or larger).

I am hazarding a guess you see few/no Tau?

Although a 4x6 is only 12" wider on the sides than a 4x4. So the deployment is the same as a 4x6 the difference is the 12" on the side.

Getting up into someone's face on a 4x4 is really not that much different compared to a 4x6, because we deploy on the long table edge.

It is still only a 24 inch run to get into your opponents deployment zone wether you play a 4x4 or a 4x6.

Connor McKane wrote:Although a 4x6 is only 12" wider on the sides than a 4x4. So the deployment is the same as a 4x6 the difference is the 12" on the side.

Getting up into someone's face on a 4x4 is really not that much different compared to a 4x6, because we deploy on the long table edge.

It is still only a 24 inch run to get into your opponents deployment zone wether you play a 4x4 or a 4x6.

Not if they deploy using a flank refusal type of deployment, it would leave a lot of units out of the fight until T3 or more

I prefer 6x4 as it gives more room to move about, also makes you think more, as your guns might just be out of range, psyflemen with 48" range, 2 on a 4x4 can give coverage to the entire board.

4x4 lets tog et into the gritty combat faster and puts you in shooting range sooner. So it depends how you like to play - basically have the game start with everyone fighting or spend a turn or two maneuvering around the table trying to set up good assaults.

-Loki- wrote:4x4 lets tog et into the gritty combat faster and puts you in shooting range sooner. So it depends how you like to play - basically have the game start with everyone fighting or spend a turn or two maneuvering around the table trying to set up good assaults.

Or if you play anything resembling a horde army, the game is more like a rush of shoppers on Black Friday.

My table is a 4x8 with a 4x6 surface with folding legs. I can put it away nicely out of the way by sliding it bewteen the stairs and potting table we have next to the mobile home.
I like the 4x6 becouse it allows manuvering, that and I usaly run 2k games. We also do planet strike alot and a 4x4 table would be brutal

I like 4x6, not to small, not to big, juuuuuuuuuust right.

I have played 40k on a 6x6 its ok, best for planetstike
I have played BattleTech on a 7x11, I would like to try that for a 40k game

4X4 for 1k or smaller, anything bigger needs the full table.

-cgmckenzie

I play at my local GW on a 4x4 and can honestly say that it makes life a lot harder for my IG. It makes the game look much more cinematic as units are closer, terrain is tighter, and the action kicks off quicker, but ultimately it's to the shooting army's detriment which isn't always cool.

I'd much prefer to play on 4x6s, and then scale the amount of terrain up to accommodate the larger playing area.

L. Wrex

4x6 because that's how it's meant to be played. 4x4s for killteam and 40k in 40minutes.

As many others have said... 4x4 1k and lower, 4x6 up to 3.5k, 5x8 for our really big games

My gaming group actually plays a fair amount of Planetstrike, and we have found that the 'perfect' size table for that expansion to be 4x8.

Either way, we normally play at my place, and I have a table that can go up to 4x8 (well, the whole thing has to go up, but its in 2 foot squares, so its easy to delineate what the bounds are).

Brother SRM wrote:

-Loki- wrote:4x4 lets tog et into the gritty combat faster and puts you in shooting range sooner. So it depends how you like to play - basically have the game start with everyone fighting or spend a turn or two maneuvering around the table trying to set up good assaults.

Or if you play anything resembling a horde army, the game is more like a rush of shoppers on Black Friday.

Well yeah, that too. A 4x4 board with a horde army on it is going to be jam packed, and with two, there won't be much room to move at all. I'd hate to see what happens to a horde army on a 4x4 table against an IG army packing a lot of ordnance. With no room to spread out, each shot will be annihilating nearly two squads.

4x6 is the best, IMO. It gives a good balance between shooty and assaulty.

4x6 is best.


4x4 is only suitable for games of 1500 or so because of limited space. any bigger and you need the extra 2' badly.