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 am planning on starting a campaign at my FLGS that would make use of multiple different point values. I have heard a lot of people say 500 and other small skirmish games are fun, yet the majority seem to want to play 2000 points. So, what size of game does Dakka prefer?

Good ole 2K for me... though I play more 1750 than anything

below 1500 you cant counter enough, above 2k its spammy.

1850-2k is just right

I think there is some value in the idea that 2000 pt games allow a person to create a list with nearly everything they want in it.

I enjoy the challenge of creating a balanced 1500 pt list as I'll never be able to get everything to fit. Those last 5-50 pts are always the toughest to make useful.

1000 pts gets a bad reputation once a person has surpassed those limits but it is fun to play with a slimmed down list. Generally it doesn't have enough flavor units to make things interesting.

We have a campaign running at our club at the moment usong 1500pts. It works really well as it allows us to get in 2 games a night (over 4 hours). I suppose it depends on what time you have available as much as anything else.

Tournament: about 2000 Pts. (helpfully my FLGS sets their tournaments at this)

Home Play : 1250 (due to having 2 kids in the house.. You'd be amazed at how long a 1250 pt game can take when you are wrangling a toddler and a kindergartener at the same time

I prefer 2000 points, but I find 1750 very fun too as it challenges my army-building skills more.

I've really settled in the 1850 range. This allows quite a bit of flexibility but the games dont slow down horribly either.

Adepticon and the tournaments I play at locally here have used this point value. I tend to default to it now.

Thats not to say I dont enjoy other sized games (1500 is nice too) - but I would prefer to go 1850 or smaller typically.

I like the 1,500 points limit. You reeeeeaaalllyyy have to make choices and you get a good fast game.

1500. Because that is what we often play at home, its about as much as I have without needing to proxy much, and it is over quickly enough for me to get a game with my mate after he finishes work on a sunday, but before I go to play footy. Its just right. But apparently people play 1750 at my local GW now, that changed in the 2 months I was away, so yeah...that'll be interesting adjusting up, I might end up loving it.

I like 2000 point games. I prefer larger games where you can field a good portion of your Codex's armory. It gives you the opportunity to try new things even in competitive settings and it's enough points to keep you well rounded against all/most opponents.

1850 lets me use a bunch of my toys without letting me just take everything. 1000 is really restricting for my Marine armies, and huge games, while fun, can go very slowly.

Weve been doing 1000 point games in a recent ongoing campaign. I have actually really started to enjoy that point total. Before hand we have done 1500-2500 depending on the situation.

1000 point games force real choices, coupled with strong missions has done well.

1500.

Enough points to be able to play any strategy effectively. Not enough points so that whoever has the shiniest toys wins. Having enough to support someone who wants to do something, without giving enough points so that people need to make meaningful sacrifices is what good game design is all about, and this comes out the best at 1500.

1000 and 1250 aren't bad for this either, but there are some codecies and some play styles that just don't work properly with this few points.

While my FLGS runs at 2k, I do like games in the range of 1500-1850. I think I just enjoy needing to make important decisions about what to add to the list without compromising the list as a whole. At 1k or so, I find that any points swapping can easily change the entire concept of the list, while at 2k it feels like you can make an entire core of an army and then add all the things to support it. At 1500, armies tend to be a core set of units with a few extras to support them.

That felt really rambly in my eyes (typing at 1 AM is hard ). Basically I like 1500 because at 1k you're hitting a few key units for the entire list, at 2k you're throwing in everything but the kitchen sink, and at 1500 you have to find a balance between the key units and the support. If that makes sense.

1500 pts is my favourite because it forces both sides to make sacrifices....

You never know what your up against at 1500...

1850 is enough to get a bit of everything so it becomes more mundane!

Well the most revered tournament down under is a 1200pt list...and unfortunately thats all my mates created lol 1200pt armys.

however i like the 1750pt level the most with a close second in the 400-500 patrol campaigns and then a 750 list for quick no time friendly battles. Still 1750 is the best for me, there are a couple of tournys that run those size lists and it allowes you to downscale to the lower points without too much fuss, but you really do get to build an army with all the bits you enjoy in it at 1750, so thats where i cast my vote.

3000pts every time for me, I like the grand sweep and I like to have loads on the table but without needing the big powerboost necessary for Apoc, I don't have the money for a squadron of 5 fireprisms or whatever and I don't have space anywhere to store a titan, nor the necessary cash. I don't think of 40k as a skirmish game, figures die very easily, so I want plenty of them to make the game worthwhile. Just my opinion...

Personal favourite is 1000 points - Here its all about generalmanship - skill. The decisions you make and movement are crucial factors

Next favourite would be 1250 then 1500.

I hate games over 1500 - Then they become slug fests or you have superpowerful armies cause people can take their dream armies

At lower points its less about super powerful battle forces and more about skill

Just one perspective, I know many will disagree

I like 1500 quite a bit as it was what I started playing this game as so I always have a soft spot for it. Most armies are fully functional at 1500 but it's actually quite challenging to build good lists. Some of the OP cheese claims I hear from some armies just don't work at 1500. You will just have to make painful decisions and that is a good thing.

Some armies like GK get really really good at higher points but do poorly like draigo lists at 1500. Blood angels also don't do all that well at 1500. Alot more xenos armies do quite well. Sisters that don't work as well at higher points is also very competitive at 1500. Very different dynamics and quite fun for me.

I prefer 2250 all the time. Nice solid force and enough to get some of the fun stuff of the army but not getting out of control

1500. Really the gold standard IMO.

Smaller than 1500 games are really great to challenge yourself and fine-tune your skills as a general. But the idea is usually to ultimately improve your "1500-point" skills.

Greater than 1500 always strikes me as tedious and cluttered. I'd rather play two 1500 pt (or smaller) games back to back than slug through a big-point game.