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.

Do you guys think you can play a 4 player capture and control game with a 4' x 8' table with you deployment zone being 12" x 24"

Similar things have been done before. If I have four people I'd rather do a 2v2 or a sort of mini tournament with two 1v1 games, leading up to a second batch of 1v1 games between the two losers and two winners.

DiRTWaL wrote:Do you guys think you can play a 4 player capture and control game with a 4' x 8' table with you deployment zone being 12" x 24"

Do you mean 2 different battles going on at the same time with overlap because you have to share a table?

Sure, make sure you have 6 feet of table space for each game so that the furthest end foot does not overlap.

If you mean something else you will need to explain further.

My group used to play 2 1v1 maches on the se table. The other games' models couldn't be targeted by your game, but could provide cover and counted as impassible terrain. Also, things could scatter onto them and hit the other games' miniatures. This was some serious fun and tool a lot of strategy.

Saptilladerky wrote:My group used to play 2 1v1 maches on the se table. The other games' models couldn't be targeted by your game, but could provide cover and counted as impassible terrain. Also, things could scatter onto them and hit the other games' miniatures. This was some serious fun and tool a lot of strategy.

That's really bizarre and such a potential fustercluck, but if you're friends who know each other pretty well that sounds doable and kind of cool. We used to play 2 1v1s on a 4x8 table. It was a little cramped, but if we stuck to 1000-1500 points we could manage in such tight spaces.

DeathReaper wrote:
Do you mean 2 different battles going on at the same time with overlap because you have to share a table?

No I mean a single battle with four players each with their own capture and control objective. A game turn would be four player turns instead of two.

The idea I have with this is having secret alliances that can be made through out the game.

Brother SRM wrote:Similar things have been done before. If I have four people I'd rather do a 2v2 or a sort of mini tournament with two 1v1 games, leading up to a second batch of 1v1 games between the two losers and two winners.

+1 2v2s are fun. FFA not so much in my limited 40k experience