Is the point level too low?

[Guest]

Not talking about apocalypse, just wondering if the normal game went up from 1500-2000pts to 4k-5k per side, if that would balance the issues seen in 40k?

 

Or rather, are the balance issues in 40k directly related to our standard for point level of games?

[pretre]

I don't know that that would balance anything but it would certainly drive up game time.

[fluger]

Just as was being discussed elsewhere, lower or raising points doesn't change the problems inherent with the system.  An overcosted unit is STILL an overcosted unit.  

[Bosco]

Just as was being discussed elsewhere, lower or raising points doesn't change the problems inherent with the system.  An overcosted unit is STILL an overcosted unit.  

And on the flip side being able to spam even more under-costed units only makes higher-point games more problematic where the impact of 'tax units' is effectively reduced.

[K_DUB]

Meh....I like lower point games anyway. 

[fluger]

Lower point is certainly MORE acceptable IMO as it at least speeds up the game play time.  

[generalripphook]

I just wanna play more apoc

[dashneeb]

I'm a big fan of lower level point games.  Keeps the super ridiculous units out, or basically makes it a make or break deal.  I find that smaller games are far more tactical.

[fluger]

One thing I'll say for smaller point games is that it takes some of the sting out of the GW standard of I GO YOU GO style gaming.  The more points available, the more likely I can employ a crippling alpha strike.  At least, that's how it appears to me.  That being said, I don't think that lower point games are more tactical than higher point games, just different.  

[Gorgosaurusrex]

I like 1,500 games the best, I think. Small games are really fun on occasion as are 4k slugfests, but I can't imagine 4k becoming the norm for pickup games. Two experienced players each with 4k points would take around 4 hours to resolve, I expect.

 

Now that I think about it, a 4k points tournament would certainly be interesting. Using Titans and Apocalypse rules would make the games go much quicker. The biggest factor in game time is the number of players, in my experience - Apocalypse armies fielded by a single player wouldn't be so bad.

[Sugarlessllama]

I think the game hits a sweet spot at either 1,500 or 2,000 points. 

 

1,500 points is a very manageable size for an evening game. It is large enough for expensive units options, but small enough that hard choices have to be made.

 

2,000 points is solid of a weekend afternoon game (Beerhammer!). It allows more "themes" to be opened up, or for a 1500 point roster to be "scaled up" by adding another expensive unit.

 

Anything in between starts to delve into the realm of tournament play. And while some people might enjoy playing against a "tournament tuned" army; I don't. So I tend to stay away from the 1,850 point mark.  

[WestRider]

Larger games do help with Low Probability, High Impact effects like D Weapons, providing enough volume both of them and of targets that really call for them that the law of averages starts to come into play a bit more. However, that's pretty much the only way they improve balance.

 

In casual play, they can be a whole lot of fun, but they're unsuitable for competitive play because of a combination of factors mentioned above: They take longer to play out, even tho the possibilities for more deadly Alpha Strikes mean that the game may well be functionally decided much earlier, and so a lot of the play time is going to be wasted, from a competitive point of view.

 

Also, I have enough trouble getting a 2K list to Tournaments on the bus. I don't want to have to double that, as much as I do enjoy thinking about the Alpha Strike possibilities in a 4K 15 Pod list :D

[Guest]

Low point games, as in 500pts-1000pts are very fun.

 

Normal games seem to range from 1500pts-2000pts and seem to be where most of the comments regarding game balance originate - from players that normally play at this band of points. This could be related to it being the most common level to play at, but I question if it's actually because the game is not presently intended to play at this level.

 

3k+ is typically reserved for apocalypse. That said, with the current unbound, detachment systems, and LoWs, it isn't too difficult to make an apocalypse level game of normal 40k.

 

As for the quickness of games, I disagree that the point level has as much impact on that as it used to. These days, players field a 5-model army via imperial knights at 2000pts, while orks still field hundreds at the same level.

 

I think the model/unit count has a larger impact on the speed of the game, than the points do. Randomized pre-game abilities and effects can also drag out the game (warlord traits and psychic powers and a few others). Random objectives (Maelstrom), and mysterious objectives also take their toll.

 

I would be curious regarding letting players just pick their psychic powers and warlord traits (ahead of time, like put it in the army list), then having a hard cap on the model and unit count, but playing at higher points per side. I wonder if you could make the higher point games resolve at the same speed as the lower point levels.

[pretre]

We'll you could, but then it wouldn't be playing the game GW sells. ;)

[Guest]

We'll you could, but then it wouldn't be playing the game GW sells. ;)

True enough.

 

But, the question is, could it be done? Can I get a larger point level of 40k to play quicker by simply having a cap on units and/or models, and removing a few of the time consuming random elements of the game?

[Threejacks]

Only solution...

 

 

More APOC!

[Guest]

Only solution...

 

 

More APOC!

But Apoc also adds a bucket of extra rules, like stratagems and others. Apoc is also intended to take a really long time and played on a larger table.

 

I'm thinking 4-5k on the same 6'x4' table, with a target game length of 1-3 hours for 5-7 turns.

 

PS: I love apoc, and certainly would love to play it more. Please, please PM me whenever you intend to play it again (beaverton-portland area), as I'm always down for more apoc.

[AbusePuppy]

One thing I'll say for smaller point games is that it takes some of the sting out of the GW standard of I GO YOU GO style gaming.  The more points available, the more likely I can employ a crippling alpha strike.

 

I actually find very much the opposite- in small games, each unit is such a huge portion of your army that even one bad roll can essentially take you out of the game in many circumstances. When you have 500pts on the table, a Tactical Squad failing morale and falling back off the board isn't just an annoyance, it's more than a third of your army gone.

 

That said, I agree with your point about smaller games not really being more or less tactical, just different. Really small games (400-750 or so) tend to play rather poorly just because of the way the system is set up, but once you hit 1K or more I find that things smooth out pretty well. 1500 is the standard for tourneys here in town and it has never really bothered me, even if it is definitely different from 1850 and such.

[Guest]

Okay, so not points.

 

How about table size? None of the current 40k BRB missions require a 6'x4' table. They just require a 24" no-man's-land between the forces.

 

If 40k was played on a smaller table, or a larger table, how would that affect game balance?

 

Likewise, how about new shapes of tables? Like a "T" instead of a rectangle.

[WestRider]

Smaller tables for a given Points Value increase the power of Blasts, Novas, and other area effects (The success of Leafblower IG in its first outing was due in substantial part to 2500 Point Games being played on 6x4 Tables, leading to a target rich environment for the Manticores and other Blasts, to say the least). Slight boost to Assault Units, since there's less room to back up, but the 24" divide is still tough to cross.

 

Larger tables for a given Points value generally exacerbate a number of the issues currently affecting 40K. Assault Units get even more screwed, mobile, long-ranged Armies like Eldar get even more powerful.

 

With partially convex tables, like T and L shapes, it would depend in part on how the intervening gap was handled. If that's completely impassable (even to Skimmers/Flyers) and blocks LoS, there might be some interesting effects, but otherwise, it's going to be much the same as for a larger table.