PDA

View Full Version : 3000 points the new standard? Why?



Galatan
16-06-2010, 19:27
Seriously, why? I'm reading a lot of reply's over the net with people talking about 3000 becoming the new standard army size (a rumour I know, but a rumour non the less) in a game or at least at tournaments. Is it strange for me to think this is really undesirable? For starters, I already have a hard time fully finishing a full 2200 pts army for a tournament.

Secondly, with the current army size I can at least fit most of an army within a case, but if the whole thing gets bumped up to 3000 I seriously doubt I will make everything fit. I'm not really looking forward to carrying a GW case and several small boxes aside.

And last but certainly not the least, the cost. Warhammer is an expensive hobby and despite the cost I will probably play both fantasy and 40k into the far future no matter what, but having to split money between 2 systems costs alot. Till now I've been able to effectively manage money between the 2 so in theory I'm able to buy enough miniatures to make a 40k and WFB army every 1.5 years or so. Bumping the points to 3000 will mean I've have to buy 800 points extra. For most army's that's quite alot of mini's/monsters. Having to stretch the schedule towards 2 years isn't something I'm looking forward to.

I think in the end I'll just stick to 2200. It's affordable, small enough to transport easily and less daunting when painting a new army. If it means I'll get to join in less tournaments...well though luck.

Thoughts anyone?

Chaos Undecided
16-06-2010, 19:30
I think the 3k standard was being put forward when people thought it was going to be 25% for all heroes in the list so they would need to have large battles to include their hugely expensive Lord choices, now that it seems Lords have their own separate 25% allowance thats probably no longer a issue.

Seth the Dark
16-06-2010, 19:32
I can see GW doing something like this but I think so far it is just people hoping they up the points so they can have their shiny stuff from 7th.

Witchblade
16-06-2010, 19:36
'3000 becomes the new standard' cannot be a rumour. GW doesn't decide what the standard is. Players do. IIRC, the rumour was that GW intends to have all their tournaments played at 3000pts.

The huge incentives to field bigger units certainly lend themselves well to >2000pts games though. Also, as mentioned above, the % restrictions force players who want to try über lords/monsters to play bigger games.

Col_Festus
16-06-2010, 19:39
You answered your own question there a bit. First off I believe one of the rules designers was asked a con "What game size was Warhammer balanced off of?". This kind of defaulted to what the game was meant to be played at. The answer was 2000 was the new standard for 5th edition 40k, and 3000 would be the new standard for 8th edition WHFB.

With the raise in core and the benefits being given to horde style armies (even with cav and monsters) the idea is to sell more miniatures yet make the games run faster. From the sound of it combats will go quicker and units will be destroyed faster. More shooting, no more partials, all premeasuring, more models attacking, more models dying... it all smacks of making things run faster with more models.

This has been the SOP it seems as of late. GW releases a new book and cuts down the point cost of miniatures, while simultaneously raising the "standard" game sizes and giving you less models in a box. The end result is a higher profit on a smaller amount of models. I've been curious for awhile what happens when they simply take this SOP too far and the games get too big and require too many models which becomes prohibitively expensive.

As it stands now most of my local gaming community has fallen in love with Warmachine for its "Skirmish" level gaming. We see way more painted forces, and way more players starting it. Ive been playing warhammer for 15 years, and as of this year I sold most of my stuff off simply because it was becoming to pricey and too time intensive to buy, assemble, and paint everything.

enygma7
16-06-2010, 19:42
This suggestion has come about because people think that due to the new advantages for bigger units, that means they have to make all their units bigger. Rather than take less units (and have less variety) they then take this to the conclusion of upping the points. This is kind of a self fulfilling prophecy - if you up the points level but keep the same sized table big units will indeed rule as they won't fear being outmanoevred as much.

Personally, I think the standard game size won't increase for most people due to the practical considerations the OP sited (carrying the models, painting an army, cost of buying the army...) and you'll see most armies having only a single (maybe 2) "behemoth" units of core troops supported by an array of smaller units, elites, characters and flack.

I think some people will increase their standard game size, but I think that owes more to a desire to play large epic battles than any actual requirement of the rules.

Tae
16-06-2010, 20:06
3k isn't the new standard whatsoever. To the point that when you reach 3k, all the main rules in the rulebook about maximum number of same specials/rares etc. are extended. Why would the 'extended' amount be the standard? Answer - it wouldn't.

People are, of course, free to play whatever points limits they chose. However I can't see many tournaments adopting anything other than 2,000 or 2,500 as their standards. Even 2,250 will, in my view, be dropped in favour of the 'rounder' 2,000 and 2,500.

theorox
16-06-2010, 20:15
I can't see many tournaments adopting anything other than 2,000 or 2,500 as their standards. Even 2,250 will, in my view, be dropped in favour of the 'rounder' 2,000 and 2,500.

Right. % are easier then, is that why? :)

Theo :chrome:

Tae
16-06-2010, 20:20
Right. % are easier then, is that why? :)

Theo :chrome:

Pretty much. 500 points (2k) or 625 (2,500) is much easier than 562.5 (2,250).

Plus 2,250 was always a stupid sized game anyway. It was a way of playing a game whereby instead of having to chose between the character or the unit to squeeze inside your army, you thought sod it I'll take both.

Voss
16-06-2010, 20:33
I think the biggest reason it won't go to 3K for most tournaments is simply time. Stores want to close at their usual time, and TOs won't want to have the tournament extend into another day and possible incur further rental costs (in cases where thats an issue). Even assuming a 3 round tournament, you'll need to _at least_ create an extra 1.5-2 hours for the larger game size, and that just isn't viable in most cases.

jayzerus
16-06-2010, 20:42
I think the biggest driver is because of the "bigger is better" concept that is floating around now.

Ex: you get one additional CR for ranks
Ex: you have to have at least 2 ranks to break ranks in flank or rear

I think people are still going to want to have the same number of units on the field, but they want them to be larger (or large enough) to do the things they need them to do. In order for this to be accomplished, you need more points.

Doesn't necessarily mean that is going to be the new standard though.

Arkh
16-06-2010, 20:45
With the massive increase in game speed due to its new mechanics I can see 3,000 point games not being an issue for stores.

bigG
16-06-2010, 20:58
baring the set up of larger/more units i think you are assuming the game will run at the same speed as the current one, many of the rules are there to speed up larger games,
also, armies under 3000pts can only include up to 4 duplicate special units eg 4 greatsword regiments(still within 25%) and 2 rare units eg 2 steam tanks, at 3000 pts plus (grand army) special goes up to 6 and rare to 4, of course this don't matter if you don't have multiple units of say, high elf swordmasters, and like a bit of variety in your armies

slayer8045
16-06-2010, 21:10
3000 is a lot more fun, I for one am looking forward to entering tournaments of 3000 points. But then again I have a lot of dwarves and could field several 3000 point armies but I fully understand your frustration.

Lady Melisandre
16-06-2010, 21:11
Consider also the logistical problem of fitting 3000 point armies onto 6' x 4' battleboards. Not a problem if you're playing chaos warriors, dwarves or any flavour of elves, excellent if you're playing ogres, but a nightmare for horde armies such as greenskins or skaven. Even an infantry heavy empire will be pushed for space.

One thing GW stores and tournament sites don't have is space. Or larger boards.

Paraelix
16-06-2010, 21:12
Larger units and a more fluid style of gameplay. It isn't really that hard to make the intuitive leap.