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 40k 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 come up with some cool narratives, even a mini-campaign.

The GHB has limits for 1k point battles, but I'm trying to think if there should be any additional limitations imposed in the name of balance. I feel AOS is already pretty smooth as far as things go, but I'm unsure if there's any potential concerns to be aware of, although most things would be left up to the players.

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 are your thoughts on this type of smaller format, and what sort of additional restrictions (if any) would you like to see in it?

I do this as well. Smaller games get new players interested. Having to buy or obtain a 2000-2500 point army drives a lot of people out.

For my money - a 1000 point game should not allow things like monster riding heroes. Thats pretty much it.

I go a step farther in my campaigns and disallow things like stormfiends being battleline but that's not neccessary depending on the group.

(however a 1000 point game where a competitive player figures out all the battleline storm fiends == all the wins against new players would be a bad time)

 auticus wrote:
(however a 1000 point game where a competitive player figures out all the battleline storm fiends == all the wins against new players would be a bad time)

(I spent a good amount of time making Skaven lists yesterday, but got especially bummed when I hit 1000 points. True, my Verminus dudes only have to take 2x 10 Clanrats (120 points in tax) ... but why take that when I could just take Engineer + 3x 3 Stormfriends? )

I like the idea of starting small, but I'm really unsure of at what points level AOS 'becomes balanced'. I want to say there's significantly more broken at 1000 points, however it feels like unbalancing the game is much more dependent upon the player and the faction or sub-faction they're working with.

Maybe 1500 is a sweeter design spot for AOS? You have the triple battleline 'comp' requirement of 2000, without the points to really bloat it out with every ultra-kill unit or hero you'd want - bearing in mind that to me having to make choices (read: concessions) leads to more interesting armies (read: less WAACy). Which doesn't always work out (min/max kicks in something fierce in the face of scarcity) ...

- Salvage

 Boss Salvage wrote:

 auticus wrote:
(however a 1000 point game where a competitive player figures out all the battleline storm fiends == all the wins against new players would be a bad time)

(I spent a good amount of time making Skaven lists yesterday, but got especially bummed when I hit 1000 points. True, my Verminus dudes only have to take 2x 10 Clanrats (120 points in tax) ... but why take that when I could just take Engineer + 3x 3 Stormfriends? )

I like the idea of starting small, but I'm really unsure of at what points level AOS 'becomes balanced'. I want to say there's significantly more broken at 1000 points, however it feels like unbalancing the game is much more dependent upon the player and the faction or sub-faction they're working with.

Maybe 1500 is a sweeter design spot for AOS? You have the triple battleline 'comp' requirement of 2000, without the points to really bloat it out with every ultra-kill unit or hero you'd want - bearing in mind that to me having to make choices (read: concessions) leads to more interesting armies (read: less WAACy). Which doesn't always work out (min/max kicks in something fierce in the face of scarcity) ...

- Salvage[/quote

Ehh it would be fairly weak. At that point level you have no way to get them close to use the warpfire so you have to leg it and you're likely to get charged by. And there's a 1/6 chance to lose another model if one dies so you're VERY vulnerable to battleshock as you'll lose a tenth of your army per model fleeing.

Lord Kragan wrote:
Ehh it would be fairly weak. At that point level you have no way to get them close to use the warpfire so you have to leg it and you're likely to get charged by. And there's a 1/6 chance to lose another model if one dies so you're VERY vulnerable to battleshock as you'll lose a tenth of your army per model fleeing.

Point, forgot about the burrowing being just out of warpfire range. I'd probably do a warpfire (2+fighty), a ratling (2+fighty/burrowy) and a wind thrower (2+fighty) unit anyway if I was doing 3x3, though I'd imagine objectives could be a pain if you're rolling from the GHB. Hero one in particular (which I find one of the hardest for 1k, as I rarely have more than 1 hero at that point).

- Salvage

These are 6-wound 4+ save models that fight as good as ogors in combat, it's not like they are ineffective outside of shooting. At any rate, I feel like 1000 points is less unbalanced than higher values because many of the really nasty armies don't function at that value. However, there is no points level where matched play becomes balanced, you need to rely on negotiating things with the players to make sure everyone is in the same ballpark.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
At any rate, I feel like 1000 points is less unbalanced than higher values because many of the really nasty armies don't function at that value.

Ahhhhhh right, formations and buff stacking and all that Adding to the anti-deathstar impetus is playing to scenario - more, smaller units are better for objective securing. Color me onboard, may see about pushing for smaller games locally as well

- Salvage

can't say what is more or less balanced, I can see it go either way. I strongly believe though that scenarios help immensely, they don't have to be 'narrative' or whatever, just make objectives rather killing and tabling the key thing.

The other thing that helps with encouraging more 'dross' is scenarios where you need certain numbers to claim objectives. 3 Storm fiends aint claiming any point if you need 6 models to claim an objective.

Depending on what you might face, If you hand out points every turn then the 3 storm fiends can't rely on killing the enemy before game end to prevent the enemy claiming points.

Make sure their are objectives at opposite ends of the table etc, so again the 2 units of 10 clan rats claims at least 1 point, even if 3 storm fiends kill one unit, whilst the 3 storm fiends claim nothing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
To OPs point, I like smaller/mid level games.

My current plans (and they may never get out of planning) if to start with a mordheim like game. There were some rules from Warhammer world at some point for a 100pt party acting as lone models that I was going to adapt.

After a few games of at that level I am thinking of upgrading the leader of the party to a proper hero (based on what model was the leader) and playing a warbands type campaign from the GHB, probably modified to be less random in army strength.

From there move to a larger campaign with full armies. At each stage I am thinking of some permanent bonuses for the heros (or ones that win a stage)