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.

Are you more into one or the other? Do you prefer to play 2-3 games on small sizes ( 500-750 ) the same day or a long one?

At least to me, but I'm a novice and me and my friends are more into learning atm, is more fun to play at least two small games with maybe different setups between them.

If I'm at a store I prefer lower points games, up to and including 1500. Sometimes you opponent can be insufferable and the last thing you want is a long game with an donkey-cave.

If I play at a friend's house, I'm happy to go to 3K points. However we better have beer, or I'm going to get bored after an hour.

I play however many points we have enough time to play (usually with a limit of 2,000 max).

500 point games are great because they're quick, fun and usually involve a lot of YOLO-Squading, which is always entertaining. If I had to pick, 500 point games are probably my favourite points limit. I usually play games with higher points limits, though.

1,000 point games and 1,500 point games are good standard points levels to play, especially if the case is such that you want a decently sized game but don't necessarily have a huge amount of time on the day.

I find that the Imperial Guard run best at 500 to 1000 points where the points count is so low my opponent cannot bring the big fancy cheesey unit combinations. Unfortunately the average game size at my group is 2250 (varying from 1500 to 3500) so getting in such a game is... Difficult.

I've always preferred lower, especially back in "my day". These huge games with huge tables are just not my cup of tea at all. That's the domain of EPIC, not 40k. My preference was always 1000-1250 points.

Bigger, so I can fit in 20-man Tactical Squads as well as all the fun stuff.

1000pts all the way! My group likes Apoc games and nothing less then 1850pts however so getting in games at 1000 is tough. Also, I guess I should mention I mainly play DE and playing at the lower points value def is in my favor with the power curve of the other codexs.

It would have been nice if this was actually a poll, it'd be interesting to see the distribution.

Personally I've always preferred low point games, I'd rather play 3 or 4 games in an afternoon than 1 big one. Bigger games just seem tedious to me. An awesome spectacle.... for about 5 minutes, then the first movement phase comes along and I want to gouge my eyes out with the tedium of moving lots of models around and then packing them up when the game finally ends.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
It would have been nice if this was actually a poll, it'd be interesting to see the distribution.

Personally I've always preferred low point games, I'd rather play 3 or 4 games in an afternoon than 1 big one. Bigger games just seem tedious to me. An awesome spectacle.... for about 5 minutes, then the first movement phase comes along and I want to gouge my eyes out with the tedium of moving lots of models around and then packing them up when the game finally ends.

done

Personally 1250-1500. You get a nice mix of models and the games aren't too long

WayneTheGame wrote:
I've always preferred lower, especially back in "my day". These huge games with huge tables are just not my cup of tea at all. That's the domain of EPIC, not 40k. My preference was always 1000-1250 points.

Pretty much agree with this. It's probably largely to do with having started playing during 1st and 2nd edition, but for me, 40k's something in the region of a couple of squads, a tank and a dreadnought on each side. Plus I'm old these days and can't be arsed with a game that goes on all day. I'd rather keep it speedy.

 suxdavide wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
It would have been nice if this was actually a poll, it'd be interesting to see the distribution.

Personally I've always preferred low point games, I'd rather play 3 or 4 games in an afternoon than 1 big one. Bigger games just seem tedious to me. An awesome spectacle.... for about 5 minutes, then the first movement phase comes along and I want to gouge my eyes out with the tedium of moving lots of models around and then packing them up when the game finally ends.

done

Cheers! You should probably add an option for "extremely extremely large (3000+) and", "Are you insane? (5000+)" for all the crazy people who consider a 2000pt game small

I think I prefer the narrative of massive games, but rarely get to play them. That said, small games can be very exciting because turns are shorter and the game feels more reactive. With big games, it's easy to forget your plans as your opponent moves their units! A timer can help in these situations!

2000-3000 is medium to me.

I generally like 1500-2000 point games, mostly because I can only do one a week, so I like to go all out.

Depends of the kind of game.

For casual games I like big games ~3000 pts. this gives me the opportunity to really field nice armies and gives room to field some more unusual builds/

for some quick semi competitive games I like small games ~750 this keeps out all the typical tournament syle lists out and gives my orks a chance if I go MSU..

2000 is extremely large? That's about the smallest games I play.

 Ashiraya wrote:
2000-3000 is medium to me.

This. Big games are Appoc team battles or single player battles with 3000-5000 pts a side

Done for even more points

1500 to 2500 is normal for my store.

My brother is the only person I'll really play large games with 3k to 6k. The only reason for this is I know how he plays, I know he knows his rules, and he isn't going to cheat me somehow. We know based on the size of the game how long it will take because I don't want only one game but if we are the only people in the store then it's fine. We can finish a game in 1 hour less than the points cost of the game. 3k games take 2 hours and 4 hours for a 5k game.

Ideally I'd like to play 500 to 1250 point games. It adds a little competitiveness to my orks and allows for less cheese but once again only my brother and 1 friend usually play this low. These are the size of the games I was introduced in back in 4th and they just run Soon much more smoothly. You are almost forced into a CA detachment vs any of the new decurion.

Generally I like medium (1,500ish) point games. I’m not adverse to larger or smaller ones though.

 Nevelon wrote:
Generally I like medium (1,500ish) point games. I’m not adverse to larger or smaller ones though.

It all really comes down to this ^^^ so everyone take note. Yeah you're gonna have your sweet spot that you like to play just as everyone else will. But I do always get the craving for a large game or a couple of short and bloody ones so I can adjust my list and have another go. It's all what you feel like playing that day and making sure you and your opponent are comfortable with whatever you decide to play.

I frankly think smaller games are where cheese becomes far more potent and at higher point levels is where you can truly make a take all comers list.

In my experience it's the other way around. At low points games there's no room for ridiculous formations, or crazy powerful units.

 Jaxler wrote:
I frankly think smaller games are where cheese becomes far more potent and at higher point levels is where you can truly make a take all comers list.

Yes and no.

Sure, you can put a knight into a 500 point list. Odds are, nothing on the table will be able to deal with it.

But at higher points you can also spam things pretty hard as well. And there are so many things out there that require tools to deal with, cramming them all into a TAC list can be impossible. How much AA do you bring? Will it be enough vs. a flyrant spam list? You can get a lot of rock/paper/scissor type matchups.

In addition to the point value, you and your opponent need to be on the same page for the style of list you want to bring. Fun lists? No holds barred? House rules? Expansions? There is a lot more then just point values when it comes to getting a game these days.

 Griddlelol wrote:
In my experience it's the other way around. At low points games there's no room for ridiculous formations, or crazy powerful units.

I've had a similar experience. Less overkill, more variation and more people willing to try out some of their more exotic armies. For me it's my Chaos Marines - it's an army I'd otherwise never consider playing, but for those 750 point games, I've painted up the chaps from Execution Force and bolstered them with a few sprues from Dark Vengeance.

I feel like with lower points games you get more variety in what armies are actually viable. I think as the points creep up certain armies fall through the cracks.

 Jaxler wrote:
I frankly think smaller games are where cheese becomes far more potent and at higher point levels is where you can truly make a take all comers list.

I agree with this. A deathstar can destroy 2 targets every turn in a 2500 point battle and you can still win with a balanced list. at 1850 or 1500 if a deathstar gets rolling the game is over at turn 2.

I generally don't get out of bed on a saturday unless it's for something past the 5000+ mark or a special event.

5k+ 40k is the way it's meant to be played and indeed hearkens back to the glory days of 4th where everything *counted* even when it wasn't optimum. At that scale, and thanks to the mid point of many people's hardcore army rarely going past the 2k mark, crazy powerful units cease to be the disturbing factor when you can simply throw 50 blast templates and a chorus line of culexus assasins at them if it pleases you.

With possibly the exception of the human and eldar titans, there really isn't anything in the core game that can stand up to proportionate retribution when the ratios are applied at the 5k mark.

In turn, it means that people can field, get use out of, and even enjoy models that look cool or they otherwise enjoy, but don't necessarily have the best rules or make sense in competition 1850 games. In particular you start to see the value of a horde section, when it's in complement to the big threats. More often than not the hordes become the deciding factor when the game truly comes down to attrition instead of shock tactics.

 Griddlelol wrote:
In my experience it's the other way around. At low points games there's no room for ridiculous formations, or crazy powerful units.

At small point games I can take a single super heavy or flyer and no one will be able to kill it because no one could bring enough guns so be able to do so at such low point levels.