PDA

View Full Version : What is THE most Tactical Challenging Point Cap ?



Akuma
14-03-2008, 18:41
In This Thread I Want You To State Your Oppinion About Point Caps.

For my 1500 points is the perfect point setting - you have plenty of troops and the game is not flowed by nasty combos and other whatnots.

REMEMBER AS THIS IS EXTREAMLY IMPORTANT

I'm only asking what point limit for building armys prod the game to be more tactical then luck based ... My observations point out that special characters and lords make the game unbalanced and focus whole 6 turns on themselves rather then rest of the armys ...

Im not asking what do you like to play or how much points are most fun to be played

W0lf
14-03-2008, 18:43
2,000 pts.

The power gap between the armies is smallest at 2,000 pts.

Jack of Blades
14-03-2008, 18:46
2250 Points.

2000 Points... it's just too little. You can't really make a proper army, I find.

EvC
14-03-2008, 18:49
2000 points, Lords banned. Often a Lord choice is about building the most efficient single game-winning model. That's not tactics.

Malorian
14-03-2008, 18:51
I think the bigger the better. The biggest thing that throws off games are magical gear. Well and ogre army can have as many tenderisers in 1000 as it can in 10,000.

Once you get into large scale battles you can have a lot more units and get into larger tactics than 'this units flees and this units counter charges'.

Sure a player can max out on characters in large games, but I've found that these players lose as their relatively small army falls to the normal loss from missile fire, warmachines and combat. It's the players that have a good balanced army and the knowledge of how to use them that do the best in big games.

I'll play one 5000 point game over five 1000 point games any day.

Timber_Wolf
14-03-2008, 18:54
2500, you have acess to everything, but youŽll have and additional bunch of troops, so you actually have something to be tactical with

rodmillard
14-03-2008, 19:01
I voted 2500;

at this point you have all the army composition options available, but I find X thousand 500 point matches prevent min-maxing with army lists. At 2,500 you have a minimum of 3 core (most people find they have to take more to make up points) with sufficient limits on special/rare units that you have to make serious choices at the composition stage. Once you get to 3000 points the scope opens up for overkill on particular units, and with 2 lord slots available you no longer have to choose between uber-caster and uber-combat character, and have asccess to enough units to field a true all-rounder force.

However, all of this applies mainly to all-comers lists. If you are tailoring the list to your opponent then I would put the bar lower, although still at least 2K to keep the character options open.

the anti santa
14-03-2008, 19:07
I voted 1500, but I really like 1999.

No lords and not too many special or rare troops, just lots of Core. I've found these to be the most tactical as it limits the amount of mega characters, magic and monsters, so the game will usually be decided who uses their basic troops best.

Staurikosaurus
14-03-2008, 19:18
I find 2000 points to be about perfect. Less than that lends itself, in my experience, to exaggerate imbalances between armies (slight advantages of some armies become clear cut game winnners)

Gimp
14-03-2008, 19:24
2000pts

some races need their Lords choices like Skaven, Night Goblins, Tomb Kings, Vampire counts.

zak
14-03-2008, 19:25
I find the most tactically challenging games are at 2000, but with no lord. As said above the Lord can often have too much influence, therefore the extra points can be spent on more troops.

Meraklis
14-03-2008, 19:27
I would say that 750 points (no special characters) is the ideal choice for a purely tactical game and also a fast one! You can of course do something nasty even in such a small game (i.e. include a steam tank) but your opponent will be probably in a position to outmanouvre it or shoot it to pieces!

Lordsaradain
14-03-2008, 19:48
I'd say 2500pts. A 200pts army is just a 1500pts army + a lord. (in general) :P

KingTut
14-03-2008, 22:38
2000
With a Lord it allows you to make your armylist with the tatics that Lords bring (Chariots for Tomb Kings, Slann etc. ) With lords you base your tatics on that. Lord in weakest unit to bring it up to par? All eggs in one basket? And with the armylist you decide how you want to play it therefore 2000 is the most challenging when designing and this effects playing. However if composing army lists is not what the OP is looking for each point range has their own tatics therefore i would pick all if it were an option.

Dux Ducis
14-03-2008, 23:16
2225.

These days many lord choices are damn expensive and can take up 1/4 of the army's points allowance alone (Vampire Lords, Chaos and Daemon Lords, HE Lords, etc. etc.).

That 225 extra points allows for another special choice, like a grave guard unit with which to grind the enemy down :)

The Clairvoyant
14-03-2008, 23:23
I think the bigger the better. The biggest thing that throws off games are magical gear. Well and ogre army can have as many tenderisers in 1000 as it can in 10,000.

Once you get into large scale battles you can have a lot more units and get into larger tactics than 'this units flees and this units counter charges'.

Sure a player can max out on characters in large games, but I've found that these players lose as their relatively small army falls to the normal loss from missile fire, warmachines and combat. It's the players that have a good balanced army and the knowledge of how to use them that do the best in big games.

I'll play one 5000 point game over five 1000 point games any day.

wholeheartedly agree. In a big game, the loss of a single character or unit is less damaging than in a small game. I play an 8000pt game a few times a year (then again, i only play warhammer about 8 times a year!) and we make it a 2-day affair. Though of course, being a VC player, losing your general is very damaging no matter what size game you play :D

King Leoncouer
17-03-2008, 10:27
500 points, it tests your true ability as far as tactics, if you have an expensive army like Bretonnia versus a cheap army like skaven you get to really see how seting up your charges and defenses works out to your advantage. when your army has only two units in it....that's how you know if your good or not.

Khaeron Baoth
17-03-2008, 10:32
I like personally 2500 points. Lot of choices and nice size of armies.

snyggejygge
17-03-2008, 10:49
1999 pts, gives you as much troops as a normal 2K game if not even more, while keeping things such as stanks, specialcharacters, slann, waltars & Dragons in check. Also it forces you to use more core units as you have fewer special & rareslots, which I find is very good.

Sephtar II
17-03-2008, 11:25
1999 for me. I am i around robin tournament using 1,999 and it is going very well. none of the above mentioned armies (VC, TK, Skaven, Lizzies) have been adversely affected by playing at this limit.

Frankly
17-03-2008, 11:37
2000pts.

You have to budget well to get everything in there. anything higher you can get your uber lord + a good amount of rank and file.

Goq Gar
17-03-2008, 11:43
1000 for me. Then again, I play lizardmen.

In 1000 points, I take little other than salamanders, skinks and priests.

NakedBarbarian
17-03-2008, 12:02
My games are always between 3 - 5k when i play against mates. At 5k, even the effects of the most uber suped up character are negated, especially when your opponent does this at the expense of buying core units, then when the character is killed the opponent is at a major disadvantage.

I've also found that at 5k its like playing three battles at the same time; the centre and both right and left flanks. Even if you massively break your opponents lines in one section of the battlefield, this can leave you majorly exposed somewhere else, so in this size battle maintaining your line and using stratergy becomes much more important.

I do play alot of 2k battles, but the loss of a character or important unit is alot more crushing in this size game......Just from my experience and the experience of my friends the 5k games tend to be alot more entertaining with hilarious results/events/situations, if not a little time consuming (mayb four hours)

Jagosaja
17-03-2008, 12:07
2250, just as Jack said. Gives the edge. I played at 1500, 2000 and 2250, and the last fits me best.