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 have played anywhere from 500 to 4000 points in 6th edition and can't decide what is the most fun or the most fair. In theory, armies should be equal at all levels based on their points, but certain armies have a distinct advantage at certain points levels. For example, Orks can bring 150 or so boyz at 1000 points, which can be incredibly difficult to kill. Which points value is the most fun to play?

Anything between 1500 and 2500 in my experience allows for the most fun. But tastes may vary on the mater

For me ( and it seems most brits) 1500 to 1750 seems to be the standard, I have noticed alot of Americans seem to play 2k +, is that the tourney standard over there?

I generally play around 1850, it seems like you can make some pretty good lists at that point level. It is also the standard in the area I live in so most local people build for that point level.

1250-1500 is probably the most balanced IMO. Some armies scale far better than others though.

For learning games, keep it smaller, but enough that you can field a variety of units: ~1000.

Once you can play 1500 point games at a reasonable pace, I find that 1750 allows you to field a big enough variety without the game becoming a total grind. At 2000 points, the game slows WAY down in my experience.

After 3 hours, I don't want to play 40k anymore.

I personnally think that 1500 is the best point level. At that point level the game is big enough to allow for tactics and for the game to swing back and forward (at lower points you are really susceptible to one round of bad dice deciding the game) and small enough that you can usually get 7 turns in in 2 hours.

I also think that the codexs are the most balanced at that level. Some codexs are really strong at lower and others spam really well at higher. At 1500 you can take whatever you want but you have to make strategic decisions because you don't have points to waste.

I really like 1850. It lets you take a big chunk of the things you think make your army fun (badass HQs, a fortification, an extra ool Heavy or elite) without straying into double-FOC and easy spam.

Most 1000-1500 games I've seen were dominated so thoroughly by IG, Orks and Nids that they did not seem fun. You spent over half your points just getting two so-so troops in there while they get a stack of bodies for less than a third of the point total and spend the rest on Killa Kans, Leman Russes, Vendettas and Tervigons you will not be able to counter.

For me, it's really whatever points level I can play. I generally only get to play once every 2-3 weeks, so any warhammer is good warhammer for me. I used to play every week or so and did almost exclusively 1500 points due to time constraints so that's what I'm most familiar with, but every once in awhile I like to do a "big" 2000 point game.

I play 1500 or 2000 pts and play agains anyone whose better than me..... that mean everybody in the world.... shame on me

I agree, the double force org at 2k does encourage lots of spam and as game->spam, fun->0 :|

I find 1500-1850 the most fun, i dont really have anything to make a good list at higher points yet xD (it'd be a huuge mix!)

I'm a big fan of the 1500 pt and 1850 pt games. 1000 can be fun for faster, friendly games, but I always find myself leaving out something I really want in a 1000 pt list. 2000+ pts seems crazy with the double FoC, I think I'd only do that for Apocalypse games and the like.

1000-1500. Enough points to field a full army with some level of redundancy on key units, but still small enough that games are fast and you have to make difficult choices about what to bring instead of just taking everything you want.

For fun casual games 1000-1500 is good

for tournies, 1500-1750 seems bettter

1850 seems to be where an army is able to be competitive, without leaving huge gaps in their overall ability to be truly TAC, without dipping into the whole mess that is 2k double force-org.

1850 also keeps games at reasonable length.

Well, we usually play our RTTs at the 1850 pt level and it works fine.
The ToS here in Germany is played at 1500 pts. That's too less if you ask me.

It REALLY varies. I personally don't like playing low-point games; 1500 is the minimum I play at (and even then I'm grumbling). I'm more comfortable at 2000+.

 Formosa wrote:
For me ( and it seems most brits) 1500 to 1750 seems to be the standard, I have noticed alot of Americans seem to play 2k +, is that the tourney standard over there?

Varies from place to place. For example, there are about three FLGSs in my area that have regular tourneys, one has there's at 1000, the other at 1500, and the third one usually plays at 2000. Pretty much, there is no standard; its whatever the store feels like running it at, so, it forces you to be a very adaptive player.

I like 1500 up to 2000pts.

I've never thad the time for anything bigger, although I'm really going to try and get a big Apocalypse game going this Summer.

1000-2000 is ideal for me. You can pretty much take what slots you want at 2000 +

I do not like anything over 2000. I need at least 1000 for it to feel like a legit game.

1500-1750 Lots of choices but it is harder to put out list that spam certain elite, Fast attack, and Heavy support units.

1500-1850 is my favorite, because it lets me take anything I want or need, and allows more expensive and inclusive strategies and synergy without cutting corners.

I prefer 1500-2000 points. 1500 for a shorter game, 2000 for a "all the toys" game.

Playing 2500, 3000, or even 4000 points gets to be a bit much, and the smaller point game can vary wildly with the dice. That said, I like all point values, and am always down for a good game at any points

1,500 give or take 250 points. Big enough to have a good sized force, but small enough to have to make choices. If the points get to high, not only do lists turn spammy, but games drag on to long.

I prefer 2000, but my play group usually wants 1500. My poor bugs need to stretch their legs!

I'm a fan of 1500. Enough room to get in what we want and not excluding anything due to lack of points. Moves quickly enough to not take all afternoon.

1000 pts is nice for a casual game but it seems like some armies can't get enough boots on the ground to feel like they're doing well.

1500-1850 is good. That said its nice to have a mad game of 2500 now and again if you have the time

I personally like 2000 points, but 1750 works well for me too. I'm not a fan of less than 1500 as while that's fine for most horde armies, elite armies struggle to take the options they want/need (I don't play an elite army, but I prefer the game to be fair )

Under previous editions I preferred 2000pt games.

With the double-FoC thing now kicking in at 2000pts in 6th, I find it turns too much into a big-guns heavy support spamming match much of the time, and prefer 1850 now, though often play 1000pt games as they're fast to play.