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 never understood the concept behind this set points value and would be happy if someone enlightened me on this matter.

I'm used to the points scale always increasing in increments of 250...i.e. 500, 750, 1000, 1250, 1500, 1750 and 2000, with the rare non-Apoc battle being 2250 etc.

Why 1850? It sticks out like a sore thumb - 150 points less than 2000 and 100 points more than 1750? 350 points more than 1500? Makes no sense.

It was a common tournament points level. Couldn't really tell you the initial origin, though.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
It was a common tournament points level. Couldn't really tell you the initial origin, though.

This. Definitely was a common point level. Very popular for local RTTs for awhile.

It almost seems like a good number. For people who want to play more than 1500 points, but don't want to do the 1999+1 shenanigans.

Davor wrote:
It almost seems like a good number. For people who want to play more than 1500 points, but don't want to do the 1999+1 shenanigans.

1850 has been around for years though. I started playing early in 4th ed and I want to say 1850 was already well established. And, well, people who want to play more than 1500 points are masochists.

I usually write up lists that can be broken into 1750, 1850, and 2000.

1850 being optimal, mainly for time restrictions, and its a little more lactose free than 2000.

My meta never plays 1750 point games, in fact i dont think ive EVER done a 1750.... just 1850 lol

1850 is a sweetspot. You don't have enough points that you can take that extra elites choice or troops choice, bu you have enough points that a third of your army is not all in your scoring section.

Personally, I like games at 1850 because I can bring more cool stuff. At 1000 or 1500 I can build the core of a list, but by throwing in the extra 350 points I can bring a couple of extra squads I normally wouldn't. I also find that 1850 gets across the feeling of large-scale warfare without being as slow as the game gets at 2000+.

That said, I also enjoy games at the 500-750 points range.

I quite enjoy 1000 point games... although i have never played more than 1250

I've played these points levels:

200
500
1000
1500
1850
2000
2500
14000

And never anything else.

1850 is dead, long live 1650

Different event organisers get stuck in their ways i guess, I've attended an 1850 this year and have a 1500 and a 1650 lined up.

In 2nd ed, the common tournament was 2000 points.

3rd ed shifted the points costs downwards, so the 'standard' became 1500.

As people got used to the faster game, it crept up to 1750.

The extra 100 points was then added by some events to allow just that little bit extra in the game. As others have mentioned, it's a 'sweet spot that allows for most armies to have a couple of their nice toys without getting too large to finish within tournament time constraints.