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 am also posting a similar thread in the AOS discussion forums, to talk about an idea I have to make the game more fun and interesting.

Basically, that idea is to encourage playing smaller battles, specifically like 1,000 point games on a 4x4 table, with a healthy amount of terrain and a strong narrative focus to the games. In the past (and granted I'm going back several years) I've found that smaller battles are often more enjoyable; things that aren't often seen at higher points levels suddenly become viable options at lower points, and it's much easier to theme games and in generally have a better overall experience to large, ponderous games that take half the day to play.

The main issue I'm thinking of, is that 1k points also need more restrictions imposed to make sure that it stays fun and balanced. I'm almost certain it needs a blanket ban on superheavies (and all of this is dependent on the specific narrative; it might be fun to have a 1k point army versus a superheavy or two with some creative custom scenario rules), maybe even Flyers because it's not always likely you can field Skyfire, and very little to handle them a flyer at low points can wreak havoc. I'm also toying with the idea of using a custom Force Org chart (probably similar to Combat Patrol), and/or limiting armies to like no more than 1-2 formations allowed, or even saying it can use Unbound depending on the scenario if someone had a cool and not overpowering idea.

I'm trying of a good way to pitch this idea; I'm sure some people will refuse because it means they can't use all of their big toys, but I'm hoping a handful will agree as I think even with a smaller group, some great battles can be had.

What sort of restrictions would you like to see in this type of format?

Small games get killed to death by skew and by Codex imbalances more than by the inclusion of any specific unit type. I'd suggest starting by banning formations outright, banning at least some alternate detachments, and reintroducing the 0-1 tag on certain units as a starting point.

Gather around children and listen to me. Let me tell a story of how our 40k games came to be. A jolly group we where playing the game. But soon found that 2000p put us all to shame. Bringing so many models made us all gasp. So we thought "1000p might be a blast". Alas very little fit in. For this was 4ed where cheap Troops made you win. So we thought "let's add just a little bit more". Thus the 1250p meta was born.

It turned out to be a perfect number. Bigger games looked dumber and dumber. Two Troop choice and a HQ per army. Superheavies not allowed darn it! Special characters only with your opponents conceit. With theese simple rules every army was complete.

Today there's special characters, formations and lords of war. That makes smaller point games almost look like a bore. Still if you really want to I'd go with the old lore. Restrict FOC wise and you may find that less is more.

Perhaps one could put special restrictions, like only 0-2 CAD and 0-1 ally, no superH no flyers, no formations unless specifically required (like for assassins) and no non-troop unit can eat up more than X% points (how much? dunno. 20%?).

Said this, I love small point games. We used to do 750 pts 40k regularly, and my best WHFB games were 1000 pts one in 6th. But is long gone.

@Nerak I love you

if oyu do anything at 1500 or under, i would suggest juts doing the old rules of CAD only, no super heavies or MC unless nids for obvious reasons.

Works out much better.

Small games are a lot of fun if you like to play non spammy msu style and your codex allows you to do so. It keeps out most of the deathstars and the big toys I don't think that it needs more restrictions. Nor do I think that it needs a 4x4 board. They are way more interesting on a 6x4 with decent amount of terrain. This allows you to actually manoeuvre.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Detachment restrictions are bad, and do not balance the game. They shift balance but shift it to those who can have the best stuff in a single one.

I play small games, but I tend to prefer larger games. I like bringing a lot of toys. (And no, I don't mean superheavies-I don't even own a Knight! Yet.)

Unless it is Killteam, I prefer 1850-2000.

I'm not sold on banning formations because some of them I think are cool, but some can be nasty I agree.

I find the the sort of game you mention to be the most fun; nice and quick, often very tense with every model mattering, some tough choices to make when building the list and your Troops become a lot more useful and valuable. 1250 is probably the sweet spot, I find anything over 1500 pretty tedious.

I'd rule out Superheavies and Multiple Formation Detachments (though you probably can't really get many of those at this level anyway) , and for the rest just keep is a 'gentleman's agreement' not to bring stupid stuff. One flyer is probably fine, as is one big tank or special character as those are going to eat up a chunk of points. That'll probably work better than enforcing actual 'rules', as it doesn't come across as trying to be restrictive.

 oldzoggy wrote:
Small games are a lot of fun if you like to play non spammy msu style and your codex allows you to do so. It keeps out most of the deathstars and the big toys I don't think that it needs more restrictions. Nor do I think that it needs a 4x4 board. They are way more interesting on a 6x4 with decent amount of terrain. This allows you to actually manoeuvre.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Detachment restrictions are bad, and do not balance the game. They shift balance but shift it to those who can have the best stuff in a single one.

An imperial knight can be fit pretty easily into a 1,000 point list. He's a big chunk of your army, but I'm confident that he will kill his points back while being semi-untouchable (unless your opponent happened to bring a knight-killer squad). He will be extremely maneuverable, effectively moving across half the board in a single turn. Putting restrictions on 1k games is probably a good idea.

I'm up in the air about the 4X4 part. 4X4 feels awfully small, but 6X4 in a 1,000 point fluffy army that doesn't necessarily have a lot of transports can potentially struggle to get somewhere relevant. In larger games, a unit that has to footslog can probably find something useful to do because there are simply enough enemy units hopping around that your opponent has to put them somewhere. On a 6X4 board, if you deploy first, your opponent can probably counter deploy to force your right flank, and then your left flank will struggle to do anything all game. But that's just me. To me, "maneuvering" in a small game is more about where you move in relation to the relatively low number of enemy unit.s. There are few enough things shooting at you that hiding from some of them but not all of them can actually work out.

@the OP: I really like smaller points games! The big thing about playing smaller points games is that you won't have the budget to cover all your bases, so it's easy for OP options to become overwhelming. At higher points, you probably have a deepstriking unit or a deathstar or some other unit that can handle scatbikes. At 1,000 points, the things that can handle scatbikes are relatively few in number. The solution to this is, of course, not to allow problematic units into your 1k games.

To me, 1k is great because you can play games more quickly, and the smaller number of units makes each squad and character matter more. You can "zoom in" on the action a bit more easily. Also, strategies that rarely work in larger games (like footslogging marines) can be perfectly fine in smaller games. When you don't have three riptides shoting at you from across the board (isntead having like, some fire warriors and a single hammerhead), you can enjoy a lot of tamer options that just don't work as well in larger games.

1,250 point games are also great and allow you to add on an extra unit or two that didn't really fit in 1,000 points. 1500 points is the low-end of what I consider a "full-size" game of 40k, and I find that it generally works better than an 1850 game provided no one is bringing a wraith knight or some other problematic unit that you need redundant units to deal with.

Oh, side note-I actually faced a Wraigthknight in a 1,000 point game.

It was actually pretty fun!

I'd say 1,000-1,500 with a two-detachment (no MFDs or formations) limit is the best way to play casual games, without worrying about the power levels of units. I can generally take whatever random fluffy stuff I want at that level, and still have loads of fun.

CAD-only works for some books, but there'd need to be a few specific exceptions for cases where a CAD is a handicap or where the army can't use a CAD. Off the top of my head Inquisition, Harlequin Masque, Skitarii Maniple, and Nemesis Strike Force detachments should be allowed as well as CAD and Allied detachments.

Smaller games can work really well if everyone is sort of on par with the 'spirit' of it. I prefer the following:

No flyers or superheavies

No allies

6x4 table

Lots of terrain (cannot be emphasized enough)

Then beyond those general rules you could get more specific on a codex-by-codex front. No Skyhammer, maybe no Invis, Scatterbikes limited to 1 in 3, stuff like that. But really what you're looking for is a "gentlemans game" mindset, unless both players for any particular game are going cutthroat. It can be hard to form a community with specific bans on a per codex basis, but if you have the right crew of people maybe something can be hammered out.

Edit: Formations are fine by me, there are only a few of them that should probably be avoided.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Oh, side note-I actually faced a Wraigthknight in a 1,000 point game.

It was actually pretty fun!

If people have an accord beforehand and/or the army can take it, it can be a very fun matchup. Just not everybody expect it as a possible "surprise" in small games.

Better design it as a possible scenario/mission, but not as a standard.

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
Oh, side note-I actually faced a Wraigthknight in a 1,000 point game.

It was actually pretty fun!

If people have an accord beforehand and/or the army can take it, it can be a very funny matchup. Just not everybody expect it as a possible "surprise" in small games.

Oh yeah, no, he asked if he could bring it and my response was "BRING IT, BRO!"

And I did indeed kill it! It was tough (took an artifact, a psychic power, a chaff unit, and a daemon prince) but gosh DARN IT was it rewarding!

B-b-but what about my fluffy grey knight/inquisition/scions army?

I like 750pts on a 4x4, 1000pts on a terrain-dense 6x4.
We don't restrict it to CAD only, but we do disallow any rules that bring in 'free units' (summoning as a prime example).
That said, there is definitely an understanding you don't bring along something ridiculous without asking first.

There's no getting around the fact that the game is borked, you really have to talk it out beforehand.
The plus side of small games it that even if it is one-sided due to imbalance or someone rolling perfectly for all their powers/traits/deployment, the game is quick enough you can fit in a second game.

I love 250 point kill team. Everyone should try it.

Except Bob. feth that guy.

Takes about an hour. No crying over spilt milk. Brutal. Fun. Can give certain dudes special rules.

Kill team and 1000pt games are definitely my preferences.

You get to bring some fun stuff and there isn't too much scope for someone to go crazy!

For our group, unless otherwise specified, games are 1000 points, limited to one CAD and one ally, no formations or alternate detachments. We don't have a rule for super heavy's, but it hasn't been an issue.

I'd go even farther than one CAD and make it one allied detachment. 1-2 troops, 0-1 of every other slot. No LoW, no flyers. LoW in a 1000 point game makes it a game of "kill the LoW" with no real strategy besides asking whether or not you spammed enough anti-tank. If you did, you win easily, if you didn't you get tabled and can't do anything to stop it. Flyers could be allowed (with the 0-1 limit on each FOC slot removing the ability to spam them), but the flyer rules are IMO too awkward for a terrain-heavy 4x4 table. Fortifications should probably also be banned, or at least limited to a single "basic" fortification (no "formations" of fortifications) with the AV 15 options banned.

 Nerak wrote:
Gather around children and listen to me. Let me tell a story of how our 40k games came to be. A jolly group we where playing the game. But soon found that 2000p put us all to shame. Bringing so many models made us all gasp. So we thought "1000p might be a blast". Alas very little fit in. For this was 4ed where cheap Troops made you win. So we thought "let's add just a little bit more". Thus the 1250p meta was born.

It turned out to be a perfect number. Bigger games looked dumber and dumber. Two Troop choice and a HQ per army. Superheavies not allowed darn it! Special characters only with your opponents conceit. With theese simple rules every army was complete.

Today there's special characters, formations and lords of war. That makes smaller point games almost look like a bore. Still if you really want to I'd go with the old lore. Restrict FOC wise and you may find that less is more.

This deserves a exalt

I started po laying shooting for 2k lists but actually enjoy the 1k-1500 more. The lower points means you cannot take everythingnyou want. You need to trim back some models or some upgrades.

To me that makes the list building more interesting/fun.