Big Game Hunters

[Chicago Slim]

A couple of our local players (myself included) are scheduling some pretty large games (8000 points per side), using straight-up standard rules (build percentages, duplicate unit limits, etc). Looks like we'll have at least three armies (Ogres, Empire and Orcs & Goblins) for a sort of round-robin mini-tourney.

1. Has anyone done a battle at this scale? What did you find, that we might want to be aware of?

2. Whether you've done something this size or not, what are your thoughts on, for example, table size? What sort of tactics you do anticipate being more or less relevant, because of the scale of the battle?


Obviously, I'm partly posting as a way of bragging about having such an awesome group, that we have at least 3 armies of 8K each between us, fully-painted and with no proxies. Partly, though, I'm actually really interested if anyone else has any experience at this size, even just as a thought-experiment.

[Gradek]

Well, if you are playing with the standard rules, then magic will be very limited (still 2d6 I presume). Under that pretense, I wouldn't waste too many points on mages.

[Chicago Slim]

I think that what we're likely to see, with each of the three builds, is the same amount of magic as we normally see in a biggish game (around about 3000, when points aren't the limiting factor on bringing magic): a level 4, a level 2, and maybe a third level 2 (or, in the case of the Empire player, a Warrior Priest or Arch Lector). Our Ogre player is quite fond of the Slaughtermaster/Firebelly combination. I prefer Orcs to Goblins (and I'm pretty sure that tons of Goblins will be hard to fit into the deployment zone, at this point level, unless we do 10' tables), so I'll probably do a pair of Orcs (one Great Shaman, on Shaman), and essentially have my choice of Big Waagh spells.

Really, I think that once you've got your Lordly level 4, magic build is about having spell choice: As you suggest, with just 2d6 to work with, there won't be any more than the usual number of spells getting cast, but with the larger table (or, at least, all 6' of the width being in use), there'll be significant units out away from where the big wiz is hanging out-- so, if you want to buff that flank, you may want an extra wizard out there, just so he has range to get an Augment or Hex off...

That said, it's definitely questionable as to whether those extra points, just for more spell choice (and, not for nothing, a back-up on the dispel, in case the other wizards are killed) is worth the points, rather than, say, another good fighter/leader...

[purge the daemon]

In large battles monsters do well because Cannon are limited I played a 24000 v. 24000 island of blood team game 4000 a player huge flying dragon units are the oonly way to go. Both sides had around 8. If a high elf player joins you ban teclis for the love of big games ban teclis.

[Chicago Slim]

Interesting point about the monsters-- I'll have to play with that. In a big game, I expect that point-density will be a consideration (that is, even on a 10' wide table, it'll be tough to deploy 8,000 points of Goblins...) Dragons are very point-dense (with a lord, typically ~500 points in a 50x100 mm space, or 0.1 points/mm^2, which is much more than is filled by the 0.0075 points/mm^2 that a 3-ppm Goblin provides, or even the 0.0112 points/mm^2 filled by an Orc Boy with a shield...) Troops that are packed in too tightly will have trouble moving, whereas point-dense fliers both leave space in the deployment zone for their friends, and can fly over them to the front line on turn 1...

[Mirbeau]

I've played a couple of games at this level, and after improvisation, we came up with a couple of bits. - With the magic, it could be worth bringing in some of the storm of magic rules - not the fulcrums - it makes magic about as effective as a normal game. Allowing reserves (arriving in turn two - like one of the rulebook's scenarios... can't remember which) seems to help rat and goblin players with congestion somewhat!

[Evil Hypnotist]

The amount of time it will take to play is worth considering, it always takes longer to sort things out than can be imagined, which can impact the game. I helped organise a 12000 point a side game back in January, we met at 10am and finished at 5pm - we had played 3 turns! The most annoying thing was I was Chaos and directly across from me was a Dwarf gunline so I spent all day having the cr*p shot out of me and the game finished before I could actually get into combat!

Organisation is your friend here, make sure everyone knows when they need to be there, give people a time limit to deploy their armies, even determine people's spells for them before the game if need be! :P

[Chicago Slim]

Thanks for the suggestions. These are two-player games, so getting "everyone" to the event should be pretty easy...

I think that, as much as possible, we're trying to treat it as a normal, two-player game.... but with more models.... I was talking to my mate yesterday about the Blood and Glory scenario, and we were wondering if we should try tweaking the objectives for that, just because large-point games tend to see more expensive models (see above) which often can't take banners... It's easy to bring plenty of banners when you need three. Bringing enough banners to lose several and still have 8-- that's harder...

[Tayrod]

General / BSB on a large target might be worth considering for the extra bubble range, the more guys you have, the more effective this will be. I would also look into magic which "gives everyone within X Y"

For the Empire guy: Might be worth considdering a horde of Halbaraiders (100) with two 50 man attatchments, and a couple of ranged detatchments deployed in front. This way one casting (remember, dice WILL be limited) will affects 200+ troops (Soulfire on 3 attatchment of gunners might knock some wounds of regenerating monsters)

[Tayrod]

Also; there's a battle report from Malorian somewhere on youtube featuring his o&g (I think the point limit was 10k) agianst OK. The OK kingdom guy took 100 bulls.. Might be worth checking out

[Zentdiam]

A lot of it comes down to what you want out of the games. At this point level, we found that you really need to play with two (side by side) tables to have enough room, or it becomes just a straight up horde slug fest. Magic is definitely weakened at this point level and we started using 3D6 for winds of magic with the opponent getting the highest and lowest dice for dispel. But, magic being toned down is neither good or bad, just depends on what you are looking for in the games. We have also used rules for splitting the sides into two teams so each side gets two generals and is able to bubble some leadership a little better. So in your case, each player takes two teams of 4k instead of one of 8. Once again this is just because we found armies like OG and Skaven start to get hurt without generals faster than a high elf or any other high leadership army. It is still perfectly doable with only one general but it can make games less one sided and give a little more wiggle room for error.

A lot of it comes down to really playing big games. Honestly they have hiccups since the game was not really designed at that point cost and it is up to each group to decide what little rules they want to change, add in, or even keep the same. Only playing lets you figure out what you want out of the big games.

[SotF]

A lot of it comes down to what you want out of the games. At this point level, we found that you really need to play with two (side by side) tables to have enough room, or it becomes just a straight up horde slug fest. Magic is definitely weakened at this point level and we started using 3D6 for winds of magic with the opponent getting the highest and lowest dice for dispel. But, magic being toned down is neither good or bad, just depends on what you are looking for in the games. We have also used rules for splitting the sides into two teams so each side gets two generals and is able to bubble some leadership a little better. So in your case, each player takes two teams of 4k instead of one of 8. Once again this is just because we found armies like OG and Skaven start to get hurt without generals faster than a high elf or any other high leadership army. It is still perfectly doable with only one general but it can make games less one sided and give a little more wiggle room for error.

A lot of it comes down to really playing big games. Honestly they have hiccups since the game was not really designed at that point cost and it is up to each group to decide what little rules they want to change, add in, or even keep the same. Only playing lets you figure out what you want out of the big games.

Magic becomes a major issue with some armies that are designed around magic being a big portion of it. Vampire Counts is one of them in a way where you might end up looking for splitting your army and simply go with them being multiple armies in a grand alliance or similar. VC also end up suffering because of how much of their capability relies on proximity to your general now, and massive games tend to end up where you may not be able to fit all of your unit in that bubble, much less the rest of your force.

[Gaargod]

It's definitely easier to take lots of 2-4k armies than it is to take one 10k army. The 10k army is cool, don't get me wrong, but the game isn't designed to work at those points - it makes much more sense that there would be loads of sub-commanders in charge of wings of the army with a master general in overall command than a single general in charge of everything by himself. The game isn't really designed to play at bigger than ~2.5k (hence Grand Army rules, which don't affect magic or generals). 3k is doable, 4k is very difficult to balance everything. More than that, no.

For magic, either do everything individually (i.e. you have 'paired' pools of magic and dispel, and you can't use dice out of one pool to help another. This actually leads to interesting tactical situations - there's nothing to stop you targeting something far away, but your opponents have to use the right pool dice to stop it), or have one big pool where you work out how many dispel dice are taken (may be easiest to roll each set of 2D6 and take the highest of each set). Individually works better, I've found, as otherwise people have too many dice to spend on big spells.

Oh, and get the biggest tables you can. I like a 6 foot width table to play 2400pts of fantasy - playing on a 4x4 is doable, but doesn't allow for much tactical movement. With a 8k game, you should then be thinking of a minimum of a 12' width table. Minimum. And that'll still be very congested. 18' width is more preferable. Obviously, it gets difficult to actually fit the boards anywhere at this stage - this is why you start thinking of flanking battles, where troops can move from one battle to the next (and allows you to put rows of tables to use). Or to have deeper battles, with extra (or even very different) deployment zones.

Play a scenario. Of some description - doesn't have to be in the main books. But have some kind of tactical considerations - personally, I love the aggregate control points scenarios. Put a load of control points down on the field (one per 2x4' or per 2k pts, for example). Holding a point on turn 1 grants you 1 point, on turn 2 gives you 2 points, etc. Maybe even have HQ points, which are placed in deployment zones but count for double if the enemy capture them by taking your deployment zone!
If you don't have scenarios, it becomes a slugfest of hordes/deathstars/gunlines. It's boring. With them, you'll actually take fast stuff, support, etc, and you know... move?

And finally, assume it'll take a f***ton of time. And then double that figure. Double that figure if you have less than 1 player per ~3k pts per side (moving models takes forever!). An 8k game will easily take up like 8 hours for 2 players, once you start including food breaks, etc.