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.

Karol wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:


no, i got myself a table and bought a 6x4 playmat for it because its the smart dimension to take when youre playing multiple different game systems.

on it i can do:

Legions (6x3)
infinity(4x4)
Malifaux (3x3)
Bushido (2x2)


And no, it litterally is the MINIMUM recommended size, stop overthinking it. 40k isnt more or less broken because you have 4" more on your table.

Good luck playing the game of w40k on an infinity table, specialy when it is what we here call an "american" style table. And I have no idea you would fit even a 1750pts game on to a 3x3 or 2x2 table. As the 4" isn't important thing. For some armies, those with extrem movment, with flyers maybe it does not matter as much. For armies that don't really care about engaging the enemy or who don't have to do it to win. Maybe it is true to a degree too. But try playing something like LoV on a small and bigger table and after 10 games on each you will definitly see the difference. Especialy when the terrain is proper GW size with proper separation of no terrain between them. On small tables some armies can't run an optimal build and screen themselfs from something like demons for example. To me that counts very much as impacting the game. Now what ever it breaks it or not, mostly depends on the army someone plays.

I think you misunderstand. They're not talking about playing 40k on a 2x2 or 3x3 table. They're pointing out that a 6x4 table/board allows them to play everything from 40k to Bushido, and all games in between. My own board at home is sliced into 3 2x4' sections, which allows for easy 4x4 or 3x3 spaces to be used.

Our groups is about 5m by 2m all told. Takes up most of my mates garage.

Great for epic games with dozens of tanks or whathaveyou.

Kinda funny too when we run a wee 4x4 skirmish on it :p

Karol wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:


no, i got myself a table and bought a 6x4 playmat for it because its the smart dimension to take when youre playing multiple different game systems.

on it i can do:

Legions (6x3)
infinity(4x4)
Malifaux (3x3)
Bushido (2x2)


And no, it litterally is the MINIMUM recommended size, stop overthinking it. 40k isnt more or less broken because you have 4" more on your table.

Good luck playing the game of w40k on an infinity table, specialy when it is what we here call an "american" style table.

Well, our Infinity table is the same table we use for anything else. Same 6'x4' table. We just use more/less of the table space depending upon wich game/how big of a game we're playing/etc...
None of us know what you mean by an "American" table. Is that somehow different than a "Polish" table?
As for playing 40k in the space generally used for Infinity? It can be done. You probably want to adjust the points/# of units used.

Karol wrote:
And I have no idea you would fit even a 1750pts game on to a 3x3 or 2x2 table.

You use less pts/less units/smaller models to fit the space on at hand. You can also try using more expensive units, wich will often result in smaller forces.

Karol wrote:
But try playing something like LoV on a small and bigger table and after 10 games on each you will definitly see the difference.

I agree. On small boards I'll bring one list & certain tactics. On larger boards my list will look different & I'll use different tactics.

Karol wrote:
Especialy when the terrain is proper GW size with proper separation of no terrain between them.

Whatever the Hell that is. Most of us have terrain of all kinds in our collections - old GW stuff, new GW stuff, FW stuff, stuff from who knows how many companies, 3d printed stuff, scratch built....

Karol wrote:
On small tables some armies can't run an optimal build and screen themselfs from something like demons for example. To me that counts very much as impacting the game. Now what ever it breaks it or not, mostly depends on the army someone plays.

Whatever army you play, on small (or large) tables you might want to bring different types of lists. What's optimal on one may not be the same on another size.

Karol wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:


no, i got myself a table and bought a 6x4 playmat for it because its the smart dimension to take when youre playing multiple different game systems.

on it i can do:

Legions (6x3)
infinity(4x4)
Malifaux (3x3)
Bushido (2x2)


And no, it litterally is the MINIMUM recommended size, stop overthinking it. 40k isnt more or less broken because you have 4" more on your table.

Good luck playing the game of w40k on an infinity table, specialy when it is what we here call an "american" style table. And I have no idea you would fit even a 1750pts game on to a 3x3 or 2x2 table. As the 4" isn't important thing. For some armies, those with extrem movment, with flyers maybe it does not matter as much. For armies that don't really care about engaging the enemy or who don't have to do it to win. Maybe it is true to a degree too. But try playing something like LoV on a small and bigger table and after 10 games on each you will definitly see the difference. Especialy when the terrain is proper GW size with proper separation of no terrain between them. On small tables some armies can't run an optimal build and screen themselfs from something like demons for example. To me that counts very much as impacting the game. Now what ever it breaks it or not, mostly depends on the army someone plays.

Bro if an Infinity table has too much terrain on it for 40k just take some off wtf is wrong with you.

Well, our Infinity table is the same table we use for anything else. Same 6'x4' table. We just use more/less of the table space depending upon wich game/how big of a game we're playing/etc...
None of us know what you mean by an "American" table. Is that somehow different than a "Polish" table?
As for playing 40k in the space generally used for Infinity? It can be done. You probably want to adjust the points/# of units used.

I still play N2 core rules for infinity (the best they ever made IMHO) back when the game was made for 4X6 tables, and it works just fine.... terrain setup just takes a bit longer.

This is what some of our N2 tables looked like







for space requirements we also do 4X4s like so.




When it comes to 40K, sure if you are playing 9th and everything happens in the center of the table you probably do not care about the rest of the table. if you play any other version of 40K where tactical movement, disparate objectives and the like are more important squeezing a 2K army onto a smaller table doesn't make much sense.


Almost every game i play is on either a 4X6 or a 4X8 including BFG, classic battletech (3d terrain rules), B5 wars rules, DUST 1947, 40K etc... about the only thing dedicated to a 4X4 is warmachine since it is designed specifically for a 4X4 table.

I have two 2x4' foldable tables which allow me to set up 2x4, 4x4 or 6x4 (requires a 6x4' base board on top of the two corner tables). I tend to use all three table sizes depending on the game. No icky game mats in my games, all RoB tiles, baby!

Don't sweat the minimun size cap in 40K, the game plays better on bigger boards. 2x4' is good for Kill Team though, KT21 doesn't play well on larger boards due to having typically only 4 "turns" and some units being slow as all heck
(cough poxwalkers cough).

Regardless of table size, amt of terrain should always feel appropriate for the mission.

Karol wrote:

Good luck playing the game of w40k on an infinity table, specialy when it is what we here call an "american" style table. And I have no idea you would fit even a 1750pts game on to a 3x3 or 2x2 table.

you have to be trolling.....

i play all of these on my 6x4 mat, but i can resize the battlefield between them

I have four 2.5x6 tables and three 2x4 tables.

I can set up three 6x4 tables at a time, and it works pretty well.

6' x 5' pretty much all the time. The local store I play at has 6' x 4' or 8' x 4', and the lack of deployment zone depth is highly noticeable and detrimental to the game.

I don't have the space for a huge board, so I find the smaller end of the scale. The current board sizes work great for small apartment 40k players.

 Blndmage wrote:
I don't have the space for a huge board, so I find the smaller end of the scale. The current board sizes work great for small apartment 40k players.

And there's a significant enough difference between 44"x60" vs 48"x72" or 44"x30" vs 48"x48" to make them "better"?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Blndmage wrote:
I don't have the space for a huge board, so I find the smaller end of the scale. The current board sizes work great for small apartment 40k players.

And there's a significant enough difference between 44"x60" vs 48"x72" or 44"x30" vs 48"x48" to make them "better"?

Simply preference, and if the Points vs. Power Level thread was any indication it might be in your best interest to not go there...

I can't help it, I'm afraid. I cannot wrap my brain about the concept because there's simply no logic behind it.

To me, saying that the slightly smaller table size is "better" would be like someone giving you a slightly smaller can of Coke, but it's a different shape than normal, and you claim it somehow tastes better.

My main table is 56" x 80", simply because that's the size of two bedroom closet doors glued together I had at a previous residence. Now I have that and a 6' x 4' table in my basement for hosting tournaments but everyone refers to it as the 'small' table. I guess it's what you're used to.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I can't help it, I'm afraid. I cannot wrap my brain about the concept because there's simply no logic behind it.

To me, saying that the slightly smaller table size is "better" would be like someone giving you a slightly smaller can of Coke, but it's a different shape than normal, and you claim it somehow tastes better.

I think you need to detach the idea of it being better so much as more convenient. 40K never had an "official" 48x48 rules for example, so people like me in my current situation where I moved house & can manage a 30 x 44 on my dining table comfortably, which is rules supported but I wouldn't manage 48 x 48 without extras.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I can't help it, I'm afraid. I cannot wrap my brain about the concept because there's simply no logic behind it.

To me, saying that the slightly smaller table size is "better" would be like someone giving you a slightly smaller can of Coke, but it's a different shape than normal, and you claim it somehow tastes better.

I'm in the same boat generally, except where certain small skirmish games are concerned. For a game of old-school necromunda, make the table smaller and cram as much terrain in as possible....

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Blndmage wrote:
I don't have the space for a huge board, so I find the smaller end of the scale. The current board sizes work great for small apartment 40k players.

And there's a significant enough difference between 44"x60" vs 48"x72" or 44"x30" vs 48"x48" to make them "better"?

Sometimes? I mean, I'd LIKE a 4x8 table at home. But given the size of the room, other furnishings, & the fact that some of us have gotten fat? I had to settle for a 4x5 table. :(

There's a marked difference in size between a 4x5 and a 4x8 table compared to 44"x30" vs 48"x48" though.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
There's a marked difference in size between a 4x5 and a 4x8 table compared to 44"x30" vs 48"x48" though.

Yes you can now play a mission designed to fit on a 4x5 and you couldn't previously. This is the difference, people would widely be happy on a 6x4, I would and I am when playing elsewhere, but spacial requirements mean the smaller tables made home gaming more accessible for some people. It's not that the game or table is better if smaller, it's just less of a hassle getting the game in.

Well I was talking to someone who said it was "better", so really why are you coming back at me when we don't disagree?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Well I was talking to someone who said it was "better", so really why are you coming back at me when we don't disagree?

Well BIndmage didn't say better, just that it works well for them so I was trying to higlight that. Also just because we don't disagree it doesn't mean there aren't extra viewpoints or thoughts that can be shared.

Dudeface wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Well I was talking to someone who said it was "better", so really why are you coming back at me when we don't disagree?

Well BIndmage didn't say better, just that it works well for them so I was trying to higlight that. Also just because we don't disagree it doesn't mean there aren't extra viewpoints or thoughts that can be shared.

Exactly.
I ever said "better", that's all coming from the reader.
I prefer the smaller size, as I have very limited space and the difference between 48"*48" and 30"*44" is huge.
It means my games have a limited size, but that's ok. I'd rather play small games instead of none.

So a standard sheet of Plywood or OTC is 8x4. That and two Saw horses is a regulation 2k table, and costs roughly 25-50$ at any decent constuction store. throw in 2 2x4x8s, and you can make borders for your tables. Those cost between 2-4 bucks. Free if you get em warped or tossed. It's not like it's hard to make a table to play standard 40k on. IT's actually cheaper than a set of models and a codex. And it was actually the first thing I made when I got into the hobby!

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
So a standard sheet of Plywood or OTC is 8x4. That and two Saw horses is a regulation 2k table, and costs roughly 25-50$ at any decent constuction store. throw in 2 2x4x8s, and you can make borders for your tables. Those cost between 2-4 bucks. Free if you get em warped or tossed. It's not like it's hard to make a table to play standard 40k on. IT's actually cheaper than a set of models and a codex. And it was actually the first thing I made when I got into the hobby!

Lucky you have the space and ability (physically, monetarily, access to a vehicle, etc) to do so.

 Blndmage wrote:

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
So a standard sheet of Plywood or OTC is 8x4. That and two Saw horses is a regulation 2k table, and costs roughly 25-50$ at any decent constuction store. throw in 2 2x4x8s, and you can make borders for your tables. Those cost between 2-4 bucks. Free if you get em warped or tossed. It's not like it's hard to make a table to play standard 40k on. IT's actually cheaper than a set of models and a codex. And it was actually the first thing I made when I got into the hobby!

Lucky you have the space and ability (physically, monetarily, access to a vehicle, etc) to do so.

If you can't afford that you can't afford 40k. Also, you can get 2 quarter sheets of plywood cut at any hardware store, there's your 4 x 4.

Play Whatever size you want.

I have a lot of 4'x6' tables with mats the same size. Good for all kinds of games. If we are playing Matched play 40k i run 2" black painters tape down the long sides of the mat and drop a 1'x4' hazard striped mat on the end for a side board.

Works good for matched play and I can strip it off whatever 4'x6' game anyone wants to play.

Hecaton wrote:

 Blndmage wrote:

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
So a standard sheet of Plywood or OTC is 8x4. That and two Saw horses is a regulation 2k table, and costs roughly 25-50$ at any decent constuction store. throw in 2 2x4x8s, and you can make borders for your tables. Those cost between 2-4 bucks. Free if you get em warped or tossed. It's not like it's hard to make a table to play standard 40k on. IT's actually cheaper than a set of models and a codex. And it was actually the first thing I made when I got into the hobby!

Lucky you have the space and ability (physically, monetarily, access to a vehicle, etc) to do so.

If you can't afford that you can't afford 40k. Also, you can get 2 quarter sheets of plywood cut at any hardware store, there's your 4 x 4.

You can play 40k for pretty cheap. Not with the official models, but if you use stand-ins and just buy the rules, dice, and a tape measure, you can play 40k for maybe $100.
It's not the same as playing with awesome terrain and the real models, but it's still 40k.

Don't be a gatekeeper.

 JNAProductions wrote:
You can play 40k for pretty cheap. Not with the official models, but if you use stand-ins and just buy the rules, dice, and a tape measure, you can play 40k for maybe $100.
It's not the same as playing with awesome terrain and the real models, but it's still 40k.

Don't be a gatekeeper.

Why not be a gatekeeper? Playing "40k" with no real models and no terrain isn't really playing 40k, not when 90% of the value of the game is the spectacle of fully painted armies on nice terrain.

(And yes, third-party models can be real models. But decent third-party models are going to cost way more than $100.)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Just Tony wrote:
Simply preference, and if the Points vs. Power Level thread was any indication it might be in your best interest to not go there...

"Simply preference" isn't really an answer to anything, it's a way to avoid discussion. Unless you're willing to discuss why it's a preference and whether or not those reasons are valid saying "just because" adds nothing to the conversation. And in this case there's no reason why the "preferences" of a handful of people should dictate table sizes for the rest of the game, especially when those table sizes are bad for game design and nothing more than an arbitrary number that happens to fit within the standard cardboard box size GW uses.

(Which, since you mention it, is a lot like points vs. PL: the PL side has no defense for the system beyond "because I said so" but insists that it's sufficient reason for GW to keep PL.)

Aecus Decimus wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
You can play 40k for pretty cheap. Not with the official models, but if you use stand-ins and just buy the rules, dice, and a tape measure, you can play 40k for maybe $100.
It's not the same as playing with awesome terrain and the real models, but it's still 40k.

Don't be a gatekeeper.

Why not be a gatekeeper? Playing "40k" with no real models and no terrain isn't really playing 40k, not when 90% of the value of the game is the spectacle of fully painted armies on nice terrain.

(And yes, third-party models can be real models. But decent third-party models are going to cost way more than $100.)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Just Tony wrote:
Simply preference, and if the Points vs. Power Level thread was any indication it might be in your best interest to not go there...

"Simply preference" isn't really an answer to anything, it's a way to avoid discussion. Unless you're willing to discuss why it's a preference and whether or not those reasons are valid saying "just because" adds nothing to the conversation. And in this case there's no reason why the "preferences" of a handful of people should dictate table sizes for the rest of the game, especially when those table sizes are bad for game design and nothing more than an arbitrary number that happens to fit within the standard cardboard box size GW uses.

(Which, since you mention it, is a lot like points vs. PL: the PL side has no defense for the system beyond "because I said so" but insists that it's sufficient reason for GW to keep PL.)

The spectacle is 90% of the game to you. Not to everyone.

I’m happy to let people play how they like-whether that’s with fully painted minis on a perfect table, or using coke cans and quarters on boxes and books, it doesn’t matter to me.

For me personally, I don’t get people who only value the spectacle. But I can respect them, and understand that they’d not want to play with my half-painted at best army. I don’t think it’s too much to ask to respect how others play the game-you don’t have to join them, but don’t crap on them.

 JNAProductions wrote:
The spectacle is 90% of the game to you. Not to everyone.

Then what else is there? The rules that are a litany of incredibly bad game design decisions, to the point that you could write a game design 101 textbook by sticking a "don't do this" label on the cover of the 9th edition rules? The cunning strategic battle of "who bought a more powerful army"? The fluff, which is completely undermined by playing with dollar store army men and piles of trash for terrain?

The reality is that if 40k was a game of cardboard tokens on a hex grid hardly anyone would have played it and GW would have gone out of business decades ago.