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.

 BladeTX wrote:
I can see your point OP, but I prefer lower point games so I can simply lose faster. Losing hurts less when I get it overwith quickly. Oh salamanders...

This is a bit sad. I hope you at least have fun beofre you lose.

And are Sallies really that bad? I thought their new rules made them quite neat, what with the flamer-save bonus, devastating drop-pod delivered flamers and meltas, and master-crafted stuff on all characters. Hell, now you can even ally in AM to get a bunch of dirt-cheap psykers to twin-link your other stuff (like centurions and such...ouch.)

 Psienesis wrote:
The game does not "open up" at 3K points, it becomes "who has the most D-Weapon platforms" at 3K points.

Me, I don't like playing anything above 1500 points, and even that is often a slog. Give me a 1K or 750 point game to kill an hour or two with, and I'm good.

how in a normal game are you fielding MORE d weapon platforms with the more points? thats apoc mate, Escalation only allows ONE LOW model. so i dont understand, even then you dont even NEED d weps at 3k...

 Sephyr wrote:

 BladeTX wrote:
I can see your point OP, but I prefer lower point games so I can simply lose faster. Losing hurts less when I get it overwith quickly. Oh salamanders...

This is a bit sad. I hope you at least have fun beofre you lose.

And are Sallies really that bad? I thought their new rules made them quite neat, what with the flamer-save bonus, devastating drop-pod delivered flamers and meltas, and master-crafted stuff on all characters. Hell, now you can even ally in AM to get a bunch of dirt-cheap psykers to twin-link your other stuff (like centurions and such...ouch.)

They're arguably the best C: SM army you can take for alpha striking; overall they're better than Raven Guard tactics.

I could only see them being underwhelming if you try to play them as a gunline, where all the buffs to melta and flamer are useless.

 ausYenLoWang wrote:

 BladeTX wrote:
I can see your point OP, but I prefer lower point games so I can simply lose faster. Losing hurts less when I get it overwith quickly. Oh salamanders...

i hope this isnt a serious attitude.... because if it is, WHY even put models on the table....

Not to hijack the thread, but yeah, it's how I feel about tabletop. I'm really just in it to paint things, and read lore.

Only time I play is when I'm egged into it by my comrades. Everything's completely broken and jacked on the tabletop, in my eyes. Exactly, why put models on the table? Do explain. :/


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BlaxicanX wrote:

 Sephyr wrote:

 BladeTX wrote:
I can see your point OP, but I prefer lower point games so I can simply lose faster. Losing hurts less when I get it overwith quickly. Oh salamanders...

This is a bit sad. I hope you at least have fun beofre you lose.

And are Sallies really that bad? I thought their new rules made them quite neat, what with the flamer-save bonus, devastating drop-pod delivered flamers and meltas, and master-crafted stuff on all characters. Hell, now you can even ally in AM to get a bunch of dirt-cheap psykers to twin-link your other stuff (like centurions and such...ouch.)

They're arguably the best C: SM army you can take for alpha striking; overall they're better than Raven Guard tactics.

I could only see them being underwhelming if you try to play them as a gunline, where all the buffs to melta and flamer are useless.

So you're saying, once again, I have to sculpt my army in such a specific way to have a negligible chance at a win? Can't see that being a game.

 Xerics wrote:
I would love to play a 12,000 point game with no superheavys. just can't find anyone to match my points value. I only have about 6 wave serpents so I do put down alot of footdar. 80 guardians, 40 storm guardians, 30 swooping hawks, 30 fire dragons, 10 dark reapers, 50 dire avengers, 30 wraithguard, 6 wraithlords, 4 warwalkers. I have alot of non skimmer units. I think i have near 20 warp spiders but i havent looked in a while. Deffinately have 4 fire prisms tho. That would be fun

Man I wish I could play against you that sounds like an amazing army, out of curiosity what is the largest normal 40k game you have played?

Jaceevoke wrote:

 Xerics wrote:
I would love to play a 12,000 point game with no superheavys. just can't find anyone to match my points value. I only have about 6 wave serpents so I do put down alot of footdar. 80 guardians, 40 storm guardians, 30 swooping hawks, 30 fire dragons, 10 dark reapers, 50 dire avengers, 30 wraithguard, 6 wraithlords, 4 warwalkers. I have alot of non skimmer units. I think i have near 20 warp spiders but i havent looked in a while. Deffinately have 4 fire prisms tho. That would be fun

Man I wish I could play against you that sounds like an amazing army, out of curiosity what is the largest normal 40k game you have played?

Largest normal game I have every played was 4500. I actually have a Battle report here on Dakka about it. It was against orcs and he didnt fare so well...

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/553992.page

I'm in the lower-point group, I don't really care for games over 1500pts. I feel like bigger and bigger games devalue the regular troops, and lord knows 40k models aren't cheap!

I like having my Dark Eldar units serve more of a purpose than being instantaneous cannon fodder.

 BladeTX wrote:

So you're saying, once again, I have to sculpt my army in such a specific way to have a negligible chance at a win? Can't see that being a game.

What I'm saying is that if you don't play to an armies *intended* strengths, you can't really blame the army for your lack of success. Salamander chapter tactics encourages high-damage alpha-striking and then mopping up. Choosing to not play Salamanders that way and then criticizing them for your lack of success is like taking a White Scars chapter tactics, refusing to use any bikes and then criticizing White Scars CT when you get slaughtered.

 Accolade wrote:
I'm in the lower-point group, I don't really care for games over 1500pts. I feel like bigger and bigger games devalue the regular troops, and lord knows 40k models aren't cheap!

I like having my Dark Eldar units serve more of a purpose than being instantaneous cannon fodder.

Thats not true. Look at my game i linked above. I have alot of foot soldiers and if you look at my gallery images I have tons of footdar. If anything troops become so much more usbale in large games. A squad of 20 guardians is devastating into any infintry unit. Fire dragons burn through tanks and swooping hawks love your vehicles too. Troops are more necessary than you think. My wraithguard are amazing at walling off my expensive units and take down enemies that dare get too close. I may play eldar but I don't play gunline Eldar. When there are enough points I bring out the scorpions, the swooping hawks and the fire dragons. I have some harlequins and banshees too but those ar eliterally the last things I add into an army list. The only models I dont have from the Eldar codex are shinign spears and Illic Nightspear. I think i am up to near 50 dire avengers as well. I dont have enough serpents for all of these guys either so theres alot of footdar on the field.

Xerics, we're just going to have to agree to disagree on that. I look at your battle report and thought it looked mind-numbing with *that* many models to move and play with (I don't mean to be insulting with that, just stating my opinion).

For example, I see you used like 30 wraithguard? To me that means that no individual model of the wraithguard is that important to put any special effort into, the individual model's unique character and/or ability to single-handedly affect the game is largely diluted the higher up in points you go. That's not an opinion, it's a literal statement of its value relative to its proportion of the force.

Now sure, I imagine some squads get to do some pretty heroic stuff here and there, but I couldn't fanthom spending $300 on wraithguards when they alone only represent a small piece of the overall army.

On the topic of smaller games, I should mention that I am an adult and work 40 hours, which impacts my opinion on this matter. To be spending more than 2 hours playing a single game feels like a waste of the small amount of free time I have.

 Accolade wrote:
On the topic of smaller games, I should mention that I am an adult and work 40 hours, which impacts my opinion on this matter. To be spending more than 2 hours playing a single game feels like a waste of the small amount of free time I have.

So are most of the rest of the respondents.
I'm married and have 1.3 kids.

rigeld2 wrote:

 Accolade wrote:
On the topic of smaller games, I should mention that I am an adult and work 40 hours, which impacts my opinion on this matter. To be spending more than 2 hours playing a single game feels like a waste of the small amount of free time I have.

So are most of the rest of the respondents.
I'm married and have 1.3 kids.

BOOM!

rigeld2 wrote:

 Accolade wrote:
On the topic of smaller games, I should mention that I am an adult and work 40 hours, which impacts my opinion on this matter. To be spending more than 2 hours playing a single game feels like a waste of the small amount of free time I have.

So are most of the rest of the respondents.
I'm married and have 1.3 kids.

Nor did I say they weren't. I was simply trying to explain where I believe my opinion comes from.

EDIT: what is this, I try to explain why I have my opinion and now it's some sort of "you got served!" match?

Alot of people don't see kids as a valid reason as to why you don't have free time. I feel like one cannot use that as an excuse as you chose to have children. I am 25 and married with 3 dogs. I work 40+ hours a week depending on what time of the year it is. Alot of people on this forum are alot like you. We choose to use our free time on warhammer 40k and what mnight be the biggest difference is that some of our significant other fully support our choice to game like we do.

 Accolade wrote:
(...)
On the topic of smaller games, I should mention that I am an adult and work 40 hours, which impacts my opinion on this matter. To be spending more than 2 hours playing a single game feels like a waste of the small amount of free time I have.

^This.

Coming to think of it, a 3K game seems nearly impossible for me to get. And if I somehow am able to find the amount of spare time to do it, it will feel like a waste to me.

I don't have kids, alot of my gaming buddies either (a) also don't have kids, or (b) have wives that don't mind them getting out for a good bit evry once in a while. We play most frequently in a friend's gaming room, so for these higher point games, we can always hit the Pause button, leave everything where its at, and come back to finish another day.

In fact, I think most games I've played so far that were over 3K have been a 2 parters.

I am really glad this thread got started and has so much momentum

Here is my experience YMMV

I started to hate 40k but I had 15 yrs. in it so I have been sticking it out, then me and my friend discovered 30k(bear with me we will get back to 40k in a moment) and we both agreed that we would play in the 3k-4k using the modified FOC and only bringing primarchs(we live for the battle of the primarchs so that’s our default LOW choice) and it changed how I saw the game, I thought it would be one giant cluster f*** but it turned out that everything it did and every choice I made rippled in the game and determined who won almost from the first model I moved. What would happen is I would have a plan and he would have a plan and there was so much on the field that we had to pick a gambit and run it in hopes that we could still counter our enemies. Mistakes where more forgiving because we had secondary forces left that could still win us a game. With these massive armies the game was never over until the last turn.

So we tried a 3k with 40k and thou it was not as much fun (we didn’t take LOW because he has a titan and I have...well I have a GI Joe tank and an imagination.) but we had a ball, it was DA vs.choas and it made us appreciate the game again. now I haven’t gotten to play with strong hold as I would like and I don’t get to game much and frankly I don’t like the attitude that is following 40k around anymore, but when I can find someone who wants to play to have fun and still try hard to win but not WAAC it makes a big difference.

In summary, in 1500pts 1 error can cost you everything and the error can be an error on Ur list, or a mismatch. in 1850 you have the same problem with death stars and broken rules and BS, but when you ramp it up to 2500-3500 one death star will not make or break the game, because ur opponent will likely have one as well, and some air, and some AT, and AM. When Ur less restricted with more points many of the faults of the current edition fall away.

I dont know how I feel about escalation yet, or how Knight Titans avoided having having the escalation rule for lost HPs but in bigger games the impact is less, and thus the frustration is less.

My 2 cents. now of course if you live near a WAAC person who buys titans just for D weapons YMMV but if you know that guy, then f that guy cause that guy sucks at any level.

My friend and I usually play 4k+ as standard, usually 6k. We have a 10k game planned for this summer.

To be honest, I find Apocalypse (rules wise) to be a more balanced atmosphere than regular 40k. Of course it comes down to coinage a bit more with Apoc, but at least every army has a good bit of access to units that can manhandle(Eldarhandle, Daemonhandle...etc) the battlefield.

Codex creep in Apoc? Not nearly as big of an issue. They're all broken and silly!

It is possible to break Apocalypse too, but it is much harder.

 Ashiraya wrote:
It is possible to break Apocalypse too, but it is much harder.

You can't break what's broken.

Never played a 2000+ point army with anything other than the basic codex units, unless maybe you count something using the Vehicle Design Rules back during 4th edition. But then again, I don;t even use allies.

 AegisGrimm wrote:
Never played a 2000+ point army with anything other than the basic codex units, unless maybe you count something using the Vehicle Design Rules back during 4th edition. But then again, I don;t even use allies.

I don't use allies either. 1 Lord of War from the Escalation book and 2 FOCs from one codex to fill the ranks.

Can I bring my Legion Deathguard?

 jasper76 wrote:
What I mean is that below 3,000 points, the game is kind of closed and balanced and predictable. But once you hit the 3000 mark, the game really starts to open up.

Do you prefer 40k games at 3K+, or 3K- ?

What the...

I prefer 500-1,000 point games. I like kill team even more. I would never, never play a game where I command 3,000 points of troops.

'Closed and balanced and predictable' is imo wrong. Smaller games require using individual squads wisely and making the most out of everything you have.

They also take less time.

 Mysterious Pants wrote:
I would never, never play a game where I command 3,000 points of troops.

Never say "never, never " lol

I really have to be in the mood to play anything over 2k. Every 500 points past 2k seems to add an exponential amount of time to play.

I find the game slow and tedious at 2k that would only get worse at 3k.

 Xerics wrote:
Alot of people don't see kids as a valid reason as to why you don't have free time.

It's not so much an excuse for not having free time as a reason for not wanting to spend large chunks of that free time moving 300 hormaguants around a table.

Could I spend a whole day playing a single battle? Sure. I could, not every day, but I'm sure I could find a day here and there to do it. Do I want to? Hell no.

I enjoy the hobby, I enjoy painting miniatures, I enjoy playing games... doesn't mean I want to spend large slabs of time painting hundreds of hormagaunts and playing long drawn out games that IMO add very little extra enjoyment. My joy in painting X model usually runs out after painting in the realm of 10-20 of them, after that it's just tedium so I can get them on the table and play a game.

Above 2000pts, the game just feels tedious. Hell, at 2000pts it can feel tedious if you went with an army like Tyranids or Orks, some would argue 1500pts. When I was younger and had more free time and would frequently spend a whole weekend doing sweet frakk all, that tedium could be more enjoyable. Now, not so much.

Now, you could argue the game becomes more balanced at high points, I'd disagree, but you could argue that. Even if it were true, I wouldn't be jumping up and down to paint another 2000pts of models, rather I'd be trying to discuss with my opponent how we can better make our 1500pt game more balanced, or hell, start a completely different game that is balanced to begin with.

 jasper76 wrote:
What I mean is that below 3,000 points, the game is kind of closed and balanced and predictable. But once you hit the 3000 mark, the game really starts to open up.

Do you prefer 40k games at 3K+, or 3K- ?

Seems to be a lot of naysayers, but I personally think you're correct. And my group has been doing this for some time.

Conventional wisdom would tell you that if you see a bunch of blocky looking pixels, that if you zoom out, the picture will look blocky.

...That is, until you zoom out quite far, and suddenly it turns into a good image, no longer full of jagged corners everywhere.

40k works similarly. In small games, fitting a knight, a flyer, or even a land raider in a list could hose half the other armies before the game starts. At the hundreds to barely at 1k range, you're virtually required to muck about with some rules to get a good game out of it. You know the tune: "no escalation no av15 no reroll save deathstars no grimoire no knights no items fox only final destination."

Once you head into the 3k territory, especially if you house-rule to keep the FOC instead of going into apocalypse mode, many of the jagged edges disappear. Knights, land raiders, flyers...they all start to fit in nicely. This is possibly also because, with a FOC still in place at that high of a points level, the prospective TFG can't fit any more of his riptides in than he could at 2k. (I personally find that single FOC is more than fair for all armies at 3k. Other than a model shortage, no one should ACTUALLY have a problem hitting 3k with 2 HQ's, 6 troops, and 3 of each of the others + loadouts, as well as a fort and an ally. You would have to grab pretty much all your book's cheapest units in each slot to get in the situation where you have all full units and under 3k points.) Even some smaller lords of war start to feel "okay," rather than "game dominating." (One of my friends stopped fielding his baneblade as a lord of war in our high point non-apoc games because he kept losing due to the victory points it gave out.) Even 2+ reroll deathstars stop being able to have the time needed to go totally around the table clearing away all the problem units before the game ends, and then of course, there's the fact that lords of war will probably see them as a massive target.

Best advice to the people who swear up and down that the game would get more broken the more points you throw in? Try it. Tell someone you want to play 3k normal single FOC. At 3k, try to keep the lords of war (if you bring one. My personal experience is that I prefer to get free VP and the escalation wl trait instead, and also just have a much larger army.) to 1 or 2 str D blasts maximum. Other than that? Go nuts. If you both fill up your FOC, you should both have answers SOMEWHERE in your force for just about anything on the other side.