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.

Ok so I am not sure if this belongs here or some where else but what size boards do you think are appropriate for the size of game you are playing? Here is what I think the scale should look like I would love to hear if y'all agree or disagree and if you disagree what do you think the scale should look like?

400-800 4x4
801- 2000 4x6
2000+ 4X8

At 1k, I might consider a 4x4 board to be adequate.

Above that, and below 3k, the normal 6x4 will be the preferred size. Above 3k you are basically playing Apocalypse.

Thanks for the input!

In my local group we play
<1500 = 4x4
1500-2000 = 6x4
and if we play a teams game then total team size is as above, but if
2001-3000 = 8x4

We play 1250 > 3k per side (So up to 6k total for all armies) games on a 4' by 6' table.

If we were to play 1000 we would still use the 4. by 6' table.

We have played 4500 per side (So up to 9k total for all armies) on a 4' by 6' table.

the only time we used a 8' by 4' we were playing 3600 points each with 3 people per side (So 10,800 points per side/ 21,600 points total) in a single game . We were not playing Apoc, just normal 40k 5th ed so no allies or flyers, but it was crazy.

Some armies are severely hampered by smaller boards while others are do much better on smaller boards. For example, it's harder to be out of range of a gunline on a 4x4; while highly mobile armies (DE) lose an advantage.

The only time I would consider playing on anything smaller than the standard 4x6 would be at 500 points. Basically a combat patrol level. And even then I'd make sure everyone knew about that before they showed up.

Regarding RAW, the standard board size is 4x6 regardless of points level.

Can someone give me the page number on which I can find the rule outlining that the table is four feet by six?

I derived this information from other sections in the book last time but was unable to find a sentence that outright stated it. It is likely something I am over looking, maybe berried right back at the front of the book, but I am very curious where this information can be found. Right now I am of the conclusion that the table size is something the two players, or their organizer, decide at the same time they negotiate point values and the likes.

i generally think this is more of a model count than a total points cost per game. GK is going to be a relatively small elite army but orks/nids will still swamp a 4 x 4 at 1k

clively wrote:
Some armies are severely hampered by smaller boards while others are do much better on smaller boards. For example, it's harder to be out of range of a gunline on a 4x4; while highly mobile armies (DE) lose an advantage.

The only time I would consider playing on anything smaller than the standard 4x6 would be at 500 points. Basically a combat patrol level. And even then I'd make sure everyone knew about that before they showed up.

Regarding RAW, the standard board size is 4x6 regardless of points level.

I agree with these points. Sticking with a standard 4x6 keeps things balanced, as different armies deal with size differently. Deployment styles also make a huge deal. If you are setting up along the long edges, the only change in going to 4x8 is a little elbow room. If you are setting up on the short edge, you have an extra two feet to cover before getting to grips with the enemy.

If I had to put point values at table size, I'd got with
4x4 =500 (maybe up to 750, depending on armies and terrain)
4x8 = 2,500+

I really don't think balance is the issue. The game has no balance to start with. The whole point of having a smaller board for smaller points is to make the game faster by allowing you to come into fighting range with you're opponent quicker and avoid forcing two turns of moving and no other action except maybe popping a few long range shots. There is nothing more annoying than playing hammer and anvile against gunline opponents at under 1000 points.

I actually miss the old Dakka Dakka standard 4x8 boards for all games. It opens up alot more tactical play with objective placement and range.

In my local group we play
<1500 = 4x4
1500-2000 = 6x4

The reason we do this is that we play almost entirely at two of our group's houses, and each one has room for a 6x4 and 4x4, but not two 6x4, so whoever is playing the smaller game, up to 1499+1 generally uses the 4x4 while we can have 1850's or 2000 double FOC games on the other board.

Sometimes we play x2 4x4 so we can have 2 games going, as we can fit a 8x4 foot table in the living room But we woundn't normally go over 1500 points to do so.

Old 4e had the board sizes at 4x4,4x6 and 4x8. 4x4 works for most armies up to about 1250, after that some armies starting getting really cramped for space. A few like to go up over 1500 in a 4x4, GK I'm looking at you, because it keeps you in there sweet spot.

Generally though 1000-3000 can play quite nice on a 4x6.

I've found that if you have a balanced set of lists, 750 is really the top you can field on a 4x4 without handing certain armies(I'm looking at you big bugs and daemons) some rather glaring advantages.

I find it a nightmare trying to deploy my Orks on a smaller table. I just run out of room so have to cram them closer together which puts them at the mercy of pie plates in the first turn or two!

We try and use a 6x4 everytime now.

JinxDragon wrote:
Can someone give me the page number on which I can find the rule outlining that the table is four feet by six?

I derived this information from other sections in the book last time but was unable to find a sentence that outright stated it. It is likely something I am over looking, maybe berried right back at the front of the book, but I am very curious where this information can be found. Right now I am of the conclusion that the table size is something the two players, or their organizer, decide at the same time they negotiate point values and the likes.

Well, I know I stated it was RAW a couple days ago; but I've since scoured the BRB and there is simply no mention of it in the Rules section. So, RAW is silent.

I was able to *infer* it using several different areas. For example, the grid lines on the Deployment Maps along with the 12" lines indicate a 6 x 4 table. This is referred to by all of the standard missions.

Going outside of the "rules" section into the greater part of the full BRB we have example missions on pages 346, 350 and 354 which outright state "6'x4' "

The sample mission on page 362 states a 4'x4' board, but that mission calls for a limit of 500 points per side. While sample mission 5, page 364, references the regular deployment map on page 118 with a force size recommendation of 750 to 2000 points. Going to the Apoc book we find verbiage where they recommend using a table larger than the "standard size of 6'x4'"


So, to sum up: the closest RAW is the grid lines on page 118 - defining a 6'x4' area. If you're willing to follow non-raw but still within a current GW publication, then the various sample missions within the BRB state 4'x4' for 500 points and 4'x6' for 750 to 2000. Above that you are in apoc territory where they say use a bigger board.

Hope that helps.

It shows you went through the same steps I did, even more then actually, to come to the same conclusion which always makes me feel better at the very least.

barnowl wrote:
Old 4e had the board sizes at 4x4,4x6 and 4x8. 4x4 works for most armies up to about 1250, after that some armies starting getting really cramped for space. A few like to go up over 1500 in a 4x4, GK I'm looking at you, because it keeps you in there sweet spot.

Generally though 1000-3000 can play quite nice on a 4x6.

Not with my army :3

I end up taking far too much space in the deployment zone...

For most standard games (under 3K per side) a 4x6 can be used ..For larger games I would suggest a larger board ..We often play on a 6x8 (2- 4x6) for games from 3K to 4.5 K per side
Since it is impossible to Deploy a 3500 point green tide and 3500 points of blobby IG on a 4x6 board..just does not work and have terrain..

It is good to hear what yall do in the larger games but my main concern is what to do at smaller points levels 1000 and lower.

 Selym wrote:

barnowl wrote:
Old 4e had the board sizes at 4x4,4x6 and 4x8. 4x4 works for most armies up to about 1250, after that some armies starting getting really cramped for space. A few like to go up over 1500 in a 4x4, GK I'm looking at you, because it keeps you in there sweet spot.

Generally though 1000-3000 can play quite nice on a 4x6.

Not with my army :3

I end up taking far too much space in the deployment zone...

Know the feeling my 1850 nids eat an entire 4x6 deployment zone.

rothrich wrote:
It is good to hear what yall do in the larger games but my main concern is what to do at smaller points levels 1000 and lower.

we run on a 4' X 6' board, just like at 2000 points, because that is what the rules call for.

Well earlier in the thread we decided that the rules technically don't call for any particular board size and that even in some of the example games they use different boar sizes. If you have a page number that says all games from 1 to 10000000 points use a 6x4 please find it and post it up on here please.

At our flgs we usually play up to 999 on a 4x4 and from 1k up to 2.5 or 3 (depending on the armies) on a 4x6. Anything above that is double board territory at least.