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.

There's propably a similar thread somewhere, but I just want to ask this question.

Most of the people I know prefer to play with 1850-2000 point armies, but I just don't see why.
Well, I see why but I for one like smaller games more (500, 600, 1000 are my favourites).
They really make you think about what's important and list making takes some tought as you must cover a lot of bases with only few-ish bodies on the table.
The games are intense as making a mistake and losing something like two Terminators is much bigger loss.
Also, not affording the biggest toys makes your troops and basic guns more important, which I like.

So tell me, what do you prefer?

people want their toys. those points let them have it.

i like 1.5k my self more.

I personaly like 2k, with the occasinal 3k thrown in.
I also like to play for 4-8 Hours to.

Mostly play 1850, big enough for a few hours, small enough to not go silly.


Although I do enjoy playing 1K points, although I do bring a Lord of Change, Heldrake and Daemon Prince to the mix.....

 Anpu42 wrote:
I personaly like 2k, with the occasinal 3k thrown in.
I also like to play for 4-8 Hours to.

And that's another thing.
Bigger games take more time. That can of course be a good thing if you like it, but with smaller points you have time to play several games.

I like 2k. Just enough to let you take a good variety but not so much that you dont have to make choices and end up just tossing everything in.

1500. an hour or less to play and I don't have to buy stuff to make a bigger army .

1500-2000, but my preferences aren't set in stone at all. I love 750 games since I can usually get other games in around them, and enjoy playing larger games, so long as they aren't horribly one-sided.

I think games under 750 aren't really worth my time. Below that level, I'd prefer to just play a skirmish game like Necromunda.

I usually play 2k but I have to say I prefer 1500 due to games going faster and generally being more tactical in the list building stage.

I find that players who are less skilled at the game prefer as big games as they can manage. These are the kind of people who always want to play 2.5K+

My biggest issue though is playing time. I am usually very fast with my turns but I often play against people with 40 minute turns and it gets really annoying to the point where I refuse games with those people.

I like 2,000 points for a few reasons.
One is we started to as we have started using this as our informal FOC we use.
HQ: 1
Elite: 1
Troops: 2
Fast Attack: 1
Heavy Support: 1
Then once we fill all of that we finish building our list. This has created a reasonably balanced force and keeps Spamming to a minimum. I also try to have one scoring unit per 500 points.

Two is I have 14,000 points of Space Wolves and I don’t get to play a lot and I like to get as many of my favorite models on the board at one time.

The more the merrier!

SkavenLord wrote:
The more the merrier!

Precisely. You can barely fit anything cool in 500 points. Playing little games only makes you angry.

I like 500pt games because they make me chose which units I want and it tends to be a really short game.
However I'm also a fan of 1750pt games (local meta doesn't do 1850) because not only is it local meta and more people are willing to play, but also it's good to play a larger game once in a while. I say 1750 over 1500 because I tend to write I 1500 list and then go, "Oh but I want that too!"
That used to be an accident but local meta has moved up from 1500 to 1750 and now I just do it on purpose

EDIT: 500pts is also great for starting a new army, getting fully painted and/or getting all the models

I prefer 1500 - 2k myself

I mostly play "Apoc Lite" games with my friends (~2500 pts. per side), but that's because there are four of us and usually all of us want to play at the same time, so we end up doing 2v2 regularly.

However, I'd like to play some 1v1 games in the 1500-2000 pts. range. It is enough to fit the majority of my preferred units.

 SarisKhan wrote:
I mostly play "Apoc Lite" games with my friends (~2500 pts. per side), but that's because there are four of us and usually all of us want to play at the same time, so we end up doing 2v2 regularly.

However, I'd like to play some 1v1 games in the 1500-2000 pts. range. It is enough to fit the majority of my preferred units.

This. Playing a 3v2 3k points a side game tomorrow [no Escalation]. When playing 2v2 we usually keep it to 2k a sid so we can actually finish.When playing 1v1 I find 1750/1850 is the sweet spot.

 Tigramans wrote:

SkavenLord wrote:
The more the merrier!

Precisely. You can barely fit anything cool in 500 points. Playing little games only makes you angry.

Not really. There's plenty of chaos in 500 point games too.

1500 points is my favored limit. Forces to make choices and the games do not drag on for too long.
If time and circumstances permit 1750 or 2000 points occasionally. Anything beyond that is specially
arranged ( themed scenario, Planetstrike or Apocalypse ).

SkavenLord wrote:

 Tigramans wrote:

SkavenLord wrote:
The more the merrier!

Precisely. You can barely fit anything cool in 500 points. Playing little games only makes you angry.

Not really. There's plenty of chaos in 500 point games too.

500pts is so much more intense. Knowing that (using an earlier example) 2 termis is the difference between winning and losing makes a big difference as to how you play, strategize and write your lists

Smaller point values may seem to be less forgiving. But losing two terminators is a big deal in an 1850 game to. It signifies loss of control/advantage in that particular engagement, but the battle elsewhere rages on. Whereas in a 500 pt game your almost tabled. Lower point values are more like a shorter time limit than a less forgiving game. Larger games are more "big picture" strategy oriented.

I have been finding once you drop below 1k you alsmost have make the FOC go away, especialy at at 500.
At 500 I realy have problems making a Marine list that is not a HQ and 2 Tac Squads.

Sorry, 1850/2000 or lower pts. Not 500 that's to low but 750 or so.

 Anpu42 wrote:
I have been finding once you drop below 1k you alsmost have make the FOC go away, especialy at at 500.
At 500 I realy have problems making a Marine list that is not a HQ and 2 Tac Squads.

This is a fair point. SM players don't tend to do that well at 500pt because of the lack of cheap viable troops.
BA can pull it off because of assault marines troops and so can GK. Both of my 500pt lists for BA and GK are built around minimum assault/strike squad in razorbacks. This works because you get firepower, maneuverability and decent combat prowess in one unit.
The key to 500pt games is the troops. You either near cheap ones (Tau) or troops that are actually useful on a larger scale (not to say FW don't have their capabilities)


Automatically Appended Next Post:
A good trick up yours leave also helps. Vehicles are almost an auto include (another reason for razorbacks) as they're hard to deal with at such low points

1000 points for me. Small enough to get a few games done in one night, but big enough to allow stronger models and units to get into play. Also prevents silly things like D weapons and the like.

Warhammer to me should be about combat between detachments, small to medium sized armies in a game that is larger than a skirmish game, but smaller than a full scale military engagement (that is what epic should be for).

We had discussed FOC having one Troop Choice for every 500 points or at under 750-850 not having an FOC at all with Dedicated Transports only and having a minimum of 2 or 3 Units.

The few times we have done this we had fun, but WAAC players may break this quickly. Think about that squads of Wolf Guard in a LRC.

1850 is my favourite.

My favorite is in the 1000 range, although any size with friends wins out.

500 or 5000. I like small games because list-building is really fun when you're trying to figure out exaclty what you can fit. 600, 750, 800, 1000 are also pretty great for this, but I like the duality of 500 and 5000 so I chose that. I like 5000pts because it's high enough that almost anything is usable, even a Phantom if you wish, but low enough that it doesn't get completely insane and you can still finish the game in a day. I love seeing two awesome armies lined up opposite each other and I tink 3-6k is generally the optimum for this type of thing, anything bigger and the sense of cohesion starts to dissolve because there are so many models the individuals almost don't matter. At 5l you can have 1-2 super-heavies, about 100-odd troops models, less for elite armies and more for hordes, and a good variety of support units with enough room for multiples of some. Army themes can still come through strong without excessive spamming.

500 to 1000 is my favorite sized battles.

1500 for me personally.