Tuesday, November 22, 2011

Point Values And Army Building Thoughts

As I'm looking more and more lately at 1,850 lists because 3/4 GT's I'm considering attending between now and June are 1,850 events I thought "Hey, naturally everyone will want to read my thoughts". Also this post got me thinking as well:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/411968.page

I find it interesting that there isn't really a common ground or a basic point level for this game we love. Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating that we set a point value I just felt that it was interesting that none had sprung up.

At this point there are really 3 point values that are generally use:

-1,500
-1,850
-2,000

To mean 1,500pts is a great point value for running a 4 game RTT and would make for a fun large scale GT that was win/loss with 9 games. It can be a very fun and fast tournament using this point value. The only issue I have with the point value is that it limits list building which can make games a little boring. I will say I used to not be a fan of 1,500 (you can probably find me saying as much somewhere on this blog) but playing it regularly last year and my urge tranistion to win/loss tournaments means I see some of the appeal of 1,500pts now.

1,850 seems to be very popular here in the upper midwest. All 3 of the GT's within less than 8 hours drive for instance this year are 1,850. This means this point value is one that I'll probably be focusing on for the next few months. I'm left with little choice since that's what I'll be playing. I noticed last year that having played my Nids at 1,850 for so long I actually started to have trouble building 2k lists where as before I couldn't build an 1,850. It's interesting how point values affect your outlook on armies, units, and books.

Now 2,000 is by far my favorite point value. I feel at this point value everyone can bring all the tools they need. I feel like the game becomes far less match-up reliant (as in not reliant at all) and far more tactical. Some people will say it's to high because it allows everyone to get everything they want. In my opinion that's a good thing. It makes for the best lists from my opponents and the best games. Though I will say with the transition of more tournies to win/loss I doubt we'll see many tournies that aren't 2k switch to it.

All of this was basically to because I was randomly thinking about it and realized that most of my lists over the next few months were going to be 1,850. Check out the site for some upcoming additions soon. I'm pretty excited about them.
Posted by Hulksmash at 4:52 PM

Comments (6)

Loading... Logging you in...
Dashboard | Edit profile | Logout
  • Logged in as
+1 Vote up Vote down
Neiltj1's avatar - Go to profile

Neiltj1 · 696 weeks ago

While I love playing 2k my lgs has been running mostly 1500 lately. The more I play at that level and build lists for that point level it "feels" like the armies are more balanced. I like that you can't just cram everything in to your list. It forces some difficult choices, and I have found that I like that.
3 replies · active 696 weeks ago
+1 Vote up Vote down
Hulksmash's avatar

Hulksmash · 696 weeks ago

I disagree that it's more balanced. At 1,500 you really can't take the tools to deal with multiple extreme builds like you can at higher point values. But it's a great point value for getting in multiple games.
0 Vote up Vote down
Neiltj1's avatar - Go to profile

Neiltj1 · 696 weeks ago

Notice my quote marks on "feels" :) I guess around here we have all sorts of codices being played and many of the older dexes just seem to do better in the 1500 brackets as opposed to the 2k ones. So my experience is just local. Good article.
0 Vote up Vote down
Corollax's avatar

Corollax · 696 weeks ago

This is a good point. I think that most of the newer/competitive codices are more constrained by points than by the FOC. Dark Eldar aside, you're seeing a lot of very expensive marine variants (or IG powerblobs) that don't really fill out their chart but cost a load of points anyway.

Lower point values definitely make these codices feel the pinch, where older armies struggle to find places to put their points at higher values.
+2 Vote up Vote down
Corollax's avatar

Corollax · 696 weeks ago

I've had precisely the opposite experience. In a 1500 point game, I can bring enough anti-tank with my Dark Eldar to deal with most problems my opponents throw at me. At higher point values, I'm too restricted by the force organization chart to cope anymore. There's just no good way to get any more lances.

Spending 140 points to get a pair of blasters on a 5-man scourge squad is a pretty raw deal when your IG opponent is bringing another Meltavet Chimera for just 15 points more. Some codices are just not built to function well at higher point values.

Units are balanced by cost. When there's no longer any sting to taking those expensive units, balance suffers. 1500 gives you options, but it also forces you to make choices. And that's a good thing in a wargame.
0 Vote up Vote down
Kharrak's avatar

Kharrak · 696 weeks ago

Locally, 1650 was the country tournament standard here for a while, which was an oddity, no one's really sure where that came from. Currently, though, 1750 is the accepted and common standard country wide, both in casual and tournament play. I actually rarely, if ever, see anything else. Most players, my self included, are generally heavily attuned to working around that specific point limit.

2000pt lists seem more of an indulgence and/or wishmaking list as a result - mostly because as stated one can generally fit in most of that they are looking to. Would love to try it out, but so many people are stuck in the 1750pt mindset, all my opponents would have to quickly write up new army lists whenever I suggest we play 2000pts :P

Post a new comment

Comments by

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)