Too many Points!

This subject has come up for me quite a bit recently so i thought i would make a post about it to see what you all thought about it. That is the fact that the point progression over the last few years in the tournament and casual play for 40k has moved up quite a bit. Five years ago the points level was 1750 for tournaments and pick up games then it jumped to 1850 and now its at 2000 points. Now this doesn't seem to be that big of a deal except for the fact that I have got alot of feed back about how people just dint like the game anymore at this high a point spread. Now I'm not saying that the game is complete garbage at higher points or anything and i know alot of casual players that will have fun with this game regardless of the points they are playing at. But I do have to agree that the points level at tournaments is just too high.

When I started to play this game for the second time because mike was running a grow league, he explained it too me back then that depending on the points your playing at some army's are inherently better then others. Like space marines at 500 points have a hard time because they just cant get enough on the table to do well in comparison to Orks, Tyranids or Eldar. When you go too high with the points you start to see more and more the imbalances that are built into the different army codex's. And 2000 points for competitive play is just too high in my view. I have talked to quite a few people who agree with this sentiment as well. Not to mention that the higher you go in the points the less valuable units in your army become because of redundancy. Getting more then one or two land raiders into a 1500point army is hard and that makes it a really valuable piece in your army. All of your units at lower points have to work harder and make you use them more creatively so that you are not just tossing away units.

I personally feel we should move away from the higher points games and try lower points games again at least at the competitive play. And I feel 1500 points is the best spread for the majority of army's at the tournament level. Not just for the reason mentioned above but also because with smaller games you have the option of running more games in a day and the more games every one plays the more you get to see who really is the best player that day at that tournament.

Just my thoughts on the matter though what do you all think?

I see what you're saying. It does make the army choices you make much more important when you're limited in points. You have to really know what units pack the most punch and makes for quicker games.

I actually played a game against someone with just the space marine portion of the black reach set, and lost with my own marine army. Damn dice rolling!

But, doesn't everyone like the idea of epic futuristic battles with legions of troops and tanks clashing in bloody combat?

I have to agree with you on that, since from experiance when I first built my that 1500 is more than enough, once I started going higher I felt I was buying models for the sake of point boosting instead of strengthening my Space Wolves, which honestly was a waste of cash...though model building is still fun nonetheless

I remember when I first started it was nothing more then 1500 points for a while. Then slowly and sure enough it climbed up to 1750, 1850 and now finally 2000points. I have to agree that 1500 is more then enough for a well developed army as 2000 is a bit large for a standard game and especially for tournaments considering your on a time limit.

I can't really figure out what all of the points escalation is for. I know GW isn't behind it, it seems like a Colorado thing. It may have been a failed attempt to balance older codexes in 5th edition, but that went out the window with space wolves. It began innocuously enough, with 2009 Tacticon having swappable 250 point detachments, but then it seems it just got silly. As for epic battles, that's what Apocalypse is for!

The problem is, for most of the year, pick-up games serve the dual purpose of practicing lists for minor and major tourneys, so as long as the trend continues, we're kinda stuck...

The increase in points is all about toys. At higher points you don't have to make decisions.
As for pick up games, why can't we change points? I know the FC store only sent 3 to 40K and none to Fantasy, and from our showing any practice was wasted ;-)
Has anyone tried smaller games? We aren't locked. I have been playing 1250 Fantasy games, and its a bit rough getting things in. I also tried a 2k game, and they required skeletons was through the roof, thank you GW.
As for GW involvement, after building my 2k list with 63 regular skeletons, I don't wonder that the rules may be made to at least reward higher points.

I vote we start to run some more turnoments and make sure we advertise a few months in advance. And make those turnoments 1500 points. I think we could easily run 3 turnoments inbetween the major turnoments here in colorado. Start in january for the first oone april the next and then late october or erlie november for the last. We could vary easily hoset them at the fort collins store or here in westminster. Or prefribly alternate between the two. Post them up on the meetups a few months in advance and make them a to-do for the 40k hobby and we can start to change things in that way.

And yes I like the giant games as much as the next guy but there is a time and place for that and i would much rather play 4 to 5 fair and balanced pick up or turnoment games rather then just two or three 2000point games with less balanance.

Also id like to use this format for the turnoments but want to see if anyone is willing to try it out. I stoles it from the bell of lost souls and it seems to me to add anouther level of tactics to the game and im all for that!!

The Alternate 40K Primary Scenario Generator


If someone wants to give me a shorter way of describing this, knock yourself out.

1) Players roll a d6 in a roll-off.
1a) If a player has a special rule modifying the roll to determine first or second turn as outlined in a standard game, he may choose to employ it for this roll-off.

2) The winner of the roll-off chooses from three options:
2.1) Choose first or second turn.
2.1a) The player taking first turn will NOT automatically choose a deployment zone.
2.2) Choose the mission from the Standard Mission Chart.
2.2.1) Seize Ground
2.2.1a) If a player chooses Seize Ground, he will place the extra objective as applicable.
2.2.2) Capture and Control
2.2.3) Annihilation
2.3) Choose a deployment from the Deployment Type Chart.
2.3.1) Pitched Battle
2.3.2) Spearhead
2.3.3) Dawn of War
2.3a) If a player chooses a deployment, he will also choose a deployment zone.

3) The next player, the individual who did not win the roll-off, will choose from the two remaining options.
3.1) Choose first or second turn.
3.1a) The player taking first turn will NOT automatically choose a deployment zone.
3.2) Choose the mission from the Standard Mission Chart.
3.2a) If a player chooses Seize Ground, he will place the extra objective, as applicable.
3.3) Choose a deployment from the Deployment Type Chart.
3.3a) If a player chooses a deployment, he will also choose a deployment zone.

4) The remaining option will be determined randomly:
4.1) The players may require a roll off to determine choice of first or second turn.
4.1a) If a player has a special rule modifying the roll to determine first or second turn as outlined in a standard game and did not use it to modify the initial roll at outlined in 1a, he may choose to employ it for this roll-off.
4.2) The players may require a d6 roll to determine the mission.
4.2a) In Seize Ground, the player with the second turn will place the extra objective, as applicable.
4.3) The players may require a d6 roll to determine the deployment.
4.3a) If the players randomly roll to determine a deployment, the choice of deployment zones will revert to the player who chose the first turn.

5) All other Game, Mission, and Scenario options will be followed as normal.
5.1) Seize the Initiative!
5.2) Mission Special Rules
5.3) Infiltrators and Scouts

In the end though im just all for makeing the hobby as much fun as possible while maintaining a compeditive edge. Thats where im comeing from at least. Let me know what you thing of these rules and of the turnoment ideas.

Um... No.
Actually, let me get some clarification first. Are both players picking their own missions or primary and secondary?
Being able to pick mission AND deployment type is WAY over powered. Also, not having a standardized round breaks the tournament system. For instance, IG1 loses all his rolls and plays three dawn of war games, IG2 either rolls well or gets opponents who despise it and never plays dawn of war.
Besides, it seems a little over complicated. 35 steps is a lot before the game.
And seize initiative before scout and infiltrate seems a little wrong.
And again, maybe I am reading to much into it, and after a couple of games, you can churn through it. I still think tournaments need to be more set.

As an aside, I agree about tournaments. I would also like to see some team tournies.

That is the point of trying this out before hand but i think it is a good set up if you give it a chance. No players are not picking the missions the games are standard and thus the objectives are standard. there is only 35 steps because they wanted to answer every question that may spring up in standard play. But this is how it works in laymen.

Mike and Colin are going to play a game. They both roll a dice. Mike rolls a 6 and Colin rolls a 3.

Mike is playing tiger claws ( but are really the astral claws =^.^= ) and decides he was to take a quarter table deployment.

Colin gets the second choice and decides he want to play kill points.

because no one picked to go first they roll again for that option and then play the game.

Easy as pie. Both player get something they want while giving up something they do not want. This way you can sort of make sure you do not get a mission that is just way out of first base and makes your army weak by proxy but at the same time your not going to get something that is perfect for you ether.

Again it needs to be tested but from reading it i think its yet another way to balance the game even more. And in a tournament setting it would work just fine. The primary objective is always the mission scenario and the secondary objective and always be the same every round. Like killing the other players most expensive HQ or getting a unit into the other players deployment or both.

I don't know, it just seems to rub me the wrong way. I think it would lead unbalanced lists. When you are no longer guaranteed to play every mission or deployment, you no longer need to prepare for them. I forsee the death of Dawn and Capture and Control.
As for balance, I think your looking for a mythical creature. Certain levels will always favor certain armies. Lower points will favor Tau, while higher points will favor Grey Knights, and IG will just smile at any level. It's the nature of the beast. The new Fantasy FAQ may be a step in the right direction, only time will tell.

Not really all the missions will get played maybe not capture and control as that game more often then not ends in a draw and is not good for anyone but i can think of a number of army's that would love dawn of war. And I don't think you will convince me that certain army's are terrible at 1500 point. Grey knights are still going to be a good army at 1500 points because they are stupidly strong and your right they will have to take less stuff and Draygo lists will suffer but to be honest that list is one of the ones that playing at 1500 points is supposed to balance out. Tau are not over powered at 1500 points but they do become compedative again and that is a good thing as they are not at 2000 points. Also the other advantages are there as well. Smaller points means faster games means that you can get more games in at the turny or get done with it faster so you have day light left to do other things. Also smaller points means its easy to get a fully painted army done and that means more fully painted army's to play. And I do not like the idea of giving up on balanced games as Not possible in 40k or that its a unicorn. If thats the case then I have no reason to give GW anymore money. I want to make a game I enjoy with friends just as enjoyable at events where I am playing people I do not know and I would at least like to find ways to do that.

All im saying is give it a chance play a few games at 1500 points and tell me what you think here and if you would try the mission rolling chart a few times and post your feed back here or on bell of lost souls where i stole it.

I don't think 25% less models will lead to more painted armies. There are those who paint and those who don't. Besides playing 1500pts won't make any of us stop buy at 1500pts, I mean, we have a problem.
What points would you suggest for Necrons?
And if you have suddenly found yourself without a system to spend your hard earned cash on, may I suggest Malifaux?

I actually agree on trying lower points for games. We shouldn't be locked into what the Wrecking Crew plays. I have been enjoying games in both systems at much smaller levels(ok, enjoying games in 40k, but that's another post). I don't agree with your game setup, but it seems clunky. Is that reason for anyone else not to try it? Nope, unless you need to play me(sicko).

I just thing your not giving it a chance its not really clunky the only thing that changes is like one or maybe two more dice rolls a game. And in the grand scheam of things thats not such a big deal considering just how many d6's are already rolled in a game of 40k. And Necrons are a odd bird atm we all know they are getting a new book and some more models soon but not exactly when so anything I say about them could change in in a month or so. But i will say that Necrons can do well at 1500 points if you play destroyer spam. Everything ont he table will be a Necron so phase out is not really a issue. What is a issue with Necrons atm is there lack of troops and having a older codex but i do think being at 1500 points will help even them.