Are Armies Actually Getting Bigger?

To add to this discussion, here's the sample 1500pts IG Army from the back of the 2nd Edition Codex:

- Cadian Command HQ (100pts) with; power sword (6), bolter (3), carapace armour (9), Primaris Master (110), force sword (10), bolt pistol (2), 2x meltagun (12), missile launcher (30), Chimera (140), frag defender (10) = 423

- Cadian Infantry Squad (100) with; flamer (7), heavy bolter (10) = 117

- Cadian Heavy Weapons Squad (60) with; 2x autocannon (32), Heavy Bolter (10), Slick Crew (20) = 122

- Ratlings Squad (80) with Dead-Eye (25) = 105

- Leman Russ = 205

- Catachan Command Squad (60) with; bolter (3), carapace armour (3), lascannon (30), heavy bolter (10), Primaris Psyker (32), Force Rod (15) = 150

- Catachan Infantry Squad (100) with; bolt pistol (2), plasma gun (6), missile launcher (30), Chimera (140) = 278

- Rough Riders Squad = 100

Total = 1500pts

Model count = 48 infantry (including 5 cavalry), 3 vehicles.

 

This gives us an idea of what GW was expecting back then.  If we convert that exact list to 10th Edition, we get a total of 895pts (950pts if we add a Castellan to upgrade the Cadian Command HQ and go with the spirit of the rules).  The various pieces of wargear, veteran abilities, and additional weapons is where the cost was brought up.

 

 

 

2 hours ago, Timberley said:

To add to this discussion, here's the sample 1500pts IG Army from the back of the 2nd Edition Codex:

- Cadian Command HQ (100pts) with; power sword (6), bolter (3), carapace armour (9), Primaris Master (110), force sword (10), bolt pistol (2), 2x meltagun (12), missile launcher (30), Chimera (140), frag defender (10) = 423

- Cadian Infantry Squad (100) with; flamer (7), heavy bolter (10) = 117

- Cadian Heavy Weapons Squad (60) with; 2x autocannon (32), Heavy Bolter (10), Slick Crew (20) = 122

- Ratlings Squad (80) with Dead-Eye (25) = 105

- Leman Russ = 205

- Catachan Command Squad (60) with; bolter (3), carapace armour (3), lascannon (30), heavy bolter (10), Primaris Psyker (32), Force Rod (15) = 150

- Catachan Infantry Squad (100) with; bolt pistol (2), plasma gun (6), missile launcher (30), Chimera (140) = 278

- Rough Riders Squad = 100

Total = 1500pts

Model count = 48 infantry (including 5 cavalry), 3 vehicles.

 

This gives us an idea of what GW was expecting back then.  If we convert that exact list to 10th Edition, we get a total of 895pts (950pts if we add a Castellan to upgrade the Cadian Command HQ and go with the spirit of the rules).  The various pieces of wargear, veteran abilities, and additional weapons is where the cost was brought up.

 

 

 

I wasn’t in for 2nd but did it have the same platoon mechanic that followed in 3rd? Because this isn’t even a legal army in 3rd.

 

as far as model count, I do think that the guard might have shrunk on the lower end of games in 10th.

My current 2k list has around 60 infantry, 4 transports, and 3-4 russes. A basic FOC for 3rd could be as many as 55 infantry, but no less than 40 infantry and a chimera.

Edited February 22 by Inquisitor_Lensoven

4 hours ago, Timberley said:

To add to this discussion, here's the sample 1500pts IG Army from the back of the 2nd Edition Codex:

- Cadian Command HQ (100pts) with; power sword (6), bolter (3), carapace armour (9), Primaris Master (110), force sword (10), bolt pistol (2), 2x meltagun (12), missile launcher (30), Chimera (140), frag defender (10) = 423

- Cadian Infantry Squad (100) with; flamer (7), heavy bolter (10) = 117

- Cadian Heavy Weapons Squad (60) with; 2x autocannon (32), Heavy Bolter (10), Slick Crew (20) = 122

- Ratlings Squad (80) with Dead-Eye (25) = 105

- Leman Russ = 205

- Catachan Command Squad (60) with; bolter (3), carapace armour (3), lascannon (30), heavy bolter (10), Primaris Psyker (32), Force Rod (15) = 150

- Catachan Infantry Squad (100) with; bolt pistol (2), plasma gun (6), missile launcher (30), Chimera (140) = 278

- Rough Riders Squad = 100

Total = 1500pts

Model count = 48 infantry (including 5 cavalry), 3 vehicles.

 

This gives us an idea of what GW was expecting back then.  If we convert that exact list to 10th Edition, we get a total of 895pts (950pts if we add a Castellan to upgrade the Cadian Command HQ and go with the spirit of the rules).  The various pieces of wargear, veteran abilities, and additional weapons is where the cost was brought up.

 

 

 

Before converting that list to tenth, how does that list compare to 3rd edition (thinking the 3.5 codex here specifically)? As the original post says, there would have been a cut in points just going from a skirmish game to an 'army' game.

1 hour ago, ZeroWolf said:

Before converting that list to tenth, how does that list compare to 3rd edition (thinking the 3.5 codex here specifically)? As the original post says, there would have been a cut in points just going from a skirmish game to an 'army' game.

It still isn’t an army games. It’s still a skirmish game, unless you’re playing around 4k+ points.

apocalypse was an army game.

27 minutes ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

It still isn’t an army games. It’s still a skirmish game, unless you’re playing around 4k+ points.

apocalypse was an army game.

It's not a skirmish game as Rogue Trader and 2nd edition were though. 3rd marked the beginning of the desire to simplify the rules to allow more models and in more time.

 

Necromunda is a skirmish game, 40k hasn't been a skirmish game since '98 I'd say.

A legal 3rd Ed army (with some adjustments for ease of porting to 10th)

 

HQ

Command Squad

capt-55

PP-10

PF-15

melta-15

plasma-15

standard-10

vox-15

grenades-5

commissar-40

 

Troops

Infantry Platoon

HQ squad

LT-35

PP-10

PF-15

Plasma-8

Melta-8

Vox-10

grenades-5

infantry squad x2

Sgt-60

Melta-8

Plasma-8

Vox-5

Grenades-5

 

Amored Fist

VSgt-10

troopers-54

Melta-8

Plasma-8

Grenades-5

Chimera-70

ML-10

HB-10

HKM10

 

ogryns-90

 

Stormtroopers

Sgt-22

Troopers-108

Melta-10

Plasma-10

Vox-5

PP-10

PW10

 

Veterans(engineers)

VSgt-20

Troopers-40

Flamer-6

Shotguns-3

BP-3

PW-10

 

chimeras x4-280

ML-40

HB-40

HKM-40

 

Rough Riders

VSgt-10

Troopers-36

Grenades-5

Lasguns-5

PW-10

 

Vanquisher-175

LC-15

HB-10

Exterminator-120

LC-15

HB-10

 

Demolisher-150

LC-15

MM-30

 

total 1936 points

 

10th version coming soon

10th version of this army

HQ

Castellan-55

command squad-65

Command squad-65

Commissar-30

 

Troops

CSTx3- 180

 

Chimeras x5-425

 

Rough Riders-60

 

Ogryns-60

Kasrkin-110

Engineers-70

 

Demolisher-190

Exterminator-180

Vanquisher-145

 

Total 1635 points

 

10th version is 301 points cheaper.

 

i could add 2 CSTs and 2 chimeras to this army and still be less than the 3rd edition army

 

 

 

 

40 minutes ago, ZeroWolf said:

It's not a skirmish game as Rogue Trader and 2nd edition were though. 3rd marked the beginning of the desire to simplify the rules to allow more models and in more time.

 

Necromunda is a skirmish game, 40k hasn't been a skirmish game since '98 I'd say.

40K does not put anything like an army on the table at 2k points.

 

the army list I posted above for 3rd is a 2k game and it’s a platoon plus some transports, 3 tanks, and some specialists. That is not an army.

 

its a reconnaissance in force, aka a skirmish force.

 

even replacing the armored fist squad with another infantry platoon, you’re still not looking at any that could be reasonably described as an army.

Edited February 23 by Inquisitor_Lensoven

One of the big problems with the current sideshow debate (skirmish vs. army) is that there are varying definitions and usages of these terms. "Skirmish" is especially problematic as it is commonly used in three distinct ways when discussing wargames. In general, most "skirmish" wargames are fought at the tactical level (as opposed to the operational or strategic levels).

 

The first meaning of "skirmish" (for tabletop miniature wargames) is in terms of what models represent. In many historical wargames, models are controlled as units, often on group bases or movement trays, and the number of models in the unit is representative of a larger number of actual combatants. For example, a stand of 8 models on horseback might represent an entire regiment. De Bellis Napoleonicis (be careful - that's an http, not https, URL I linked) is a good example of this [non-"skirmish"] style of game. "Skirmish" games were an alternative to this style of wargame and used 1:1 representation - one model represented one combatant; and models were controlled individually rather than as units. Under this criteria, Warhammer 40,000 might be considered a skirmish game because of the 1:1 model representation.

 

The second meaning of "skirmish" is in terms of the number of models that might be used for each side, and this seems to be the most common usage of "skirmish" currently. This might vary with the game. The smallest type of skirmish game is a duel, featuring only 1 model per side. "Skirmish" wargames might range in size from a handful of models per side, typically 3-12 (roughly a fire team or squad in modern military terms), to a few dozen (roughly a platoon in modern military terms). Some "skirmish" level wargames might even allow for 100 (or more) models per side. For example, Arena Rex represents the lower end of this scale while Barons War represents the more common upper end, with Sharp Practice allowing more than 100 models per side in large games. Under this criteria, Warhammer 40,000 would be considered a skirmish game at the Combat Patrol level, and might be considered a large skirmish game at the higher points values. Many players [mistakenly] consider only those games at the lower end of this spectrum to be "skirmish" wargames (myself included).

 

The third meaning of "skirmish" is somewhat related to the second, but is meaningful in terms of relating the conflict played out on the tabletop (i.e., the game) to the larger conflict in which it is set (which may or may not be represented by other games, whether set concurrently or sequentially, or both). This meaning also draws upon real world usages, though the more common alternative to "skirmish" in military doctrine would be something along the lines of "engagement." A "skirmish" is one minor engagement in a larger battle, and multiple battles combine to make a war. Under this criteria, Warhammer 40,00 might be considered a skirmish game. Of note, however, the Warhammer 40,000 game has been billed as a "battle" game since the 3rd edition. The Epic games (in all of their iterations) and the Apocalypse games would be considered large-scale "skirmish" or "battle" games and not "army" games under this meaning.

 

It must be understood, however, that the definitions of "skirmish" are fuzzy and many people mean different things when they use the word. For my purposes in this post, I've drawn from The Wargaming Compendium by Henry Hyde, how numerous games describe themselves (dozens in addition to those that I linked), various articles in Wargames Illustrated magazine, and U.S. military doctrine (the open source stuff you can find).

 

Debating about whether Warhammer 40,000 is a skirmish level game or some other kind of game is largely irrelevant to the topic at hand - are armies (i.e., the forces we typically see on the tabletop) getting larger? That debate can be framed in several ways, and the answer will really depend upon the environment in which the game is played. Hobbyists playing in their basement might use armies of certain sizes while hobbyists who focus their gaming on official tournaments might use armies of entirely different sizes (indeed, different tournaments might use different sizes of armies). And the question is complicated by the change in metrics - points were used for a period, but an entirely different system is used now. The question can really only be answered accurately if you define parameters that you can reliably compare through editions (and I would ignore the 1st and 2nd editions, using the 3rd edition as the starting point).

 

Overall, I really like this article. It uses objective methodology and data to draw a supportable conclusion, and it presents the information in a manner that is easily understood.

Very interesting! I knew the drop from 2nd to 3rd would be dramatic but I am surprised at how stable most of the armies have been over time. I'm curious to see how Adeptus Mechanicus would fit on the chart since 7th since they plunged into a full-on horde army since their inception. Perhaps 10th might have changed that but since I gave up on playing them in favour of Orks I couldn't tell for sure. Are there any other armies that have been "re-invented" significantly from one edition to another that might affect the data? As previously mentioned I guess the move from squads to platoons for guard in 2nd to 3rd might be a big one?

This discussion is very interesting; it's made me reflect upon the differences between the size of games (in terms of model count) played now compared to previous editions. 

 

My history with the game is that I started with 3rd, mainly playing 1000 points against my friend, though I did attend one Grand Tournament which was 1,500 points. 

 

I only played 4th a handful of times, but played a lot of 5th, mainly with my Chaos Marines. IIRC, 1,500 was still the standard for games then, and I think I could get around 50 models in at that level. 

 

Things were similar for 6th, but then I took a break from the hobby and missed 7th & 8th altogether. During 9th I did build a couple of armies, but didn't get the chance to play. During 9th I did build and paint a Death Guard army, which (at the time) was 2k points: 4 units of 7 Plague Marines, 2x20 Poxwalkers, a few HQ, 2 Blight Drones and a couple of Plagueburst Crawlers. In 10th that's dropped to around 1,500 points! 

 

I've been playing 10th, taking part in a campaign using Crusade rules - my army is at 1,600 points, but when it gets to 2,000 it'll be around 70 models. 

 

So, how wide is the points discrepancy now to older editions?  To illustrate what I've found, here's my 5th edition styled Space Marine demi-company that I painted during the first lockdown of the pandemic:

 

Looking online, according to the 5th Edition Marine Codex, that's 2,260 points. The same army in 10th (counting the Assault Squad as Assault Intercessors with Jump Packs) is 1,855 (without enhancements) - about 400 points cheaper! Some units (Tactical Squad, Chapter Master) are 100 points cheaper than their 5th Ed values; though vehicles are more expensive now, the reduction for infantry makes a big difference. 

 

Next year, when 11th drops, I wonder how we'll see points change again - will they increase so there's fewer models for potentially faster games? Further drops for bigger armies?

 

Whatever the changes, I'm a collector and painter first, so I doubt it'll affect my approach to the hobby. Apart from maybe taking longer to get an army fully painted..! 

5 hours ago, firestorm40k said:

This discussion is very interesting; it's made me reflect upon the differences between the size of games (in terms of model count) played now compared to previous editions. 

 

My history with the game is that I started with 3rd, mainly playing 1000 points against my friend, though I did attend one Grand Tournament which was 1,500 points. 

 

I only played 4th a handful of times, but played a lot of 5th, mainly with my Chaos Marines. IIRC, 1,500 was still the standard for games then, and I think I could get around 50 models in at that level. 

 

Things were similar for 6th, but then I took a break from the hobby and missed 7th & 8th altogether. During 9th I did build a couple of armies, but didn't get the chance to play. During 9th I did build and paint a Death Guard army, which (at the time) was 2k points: 4 units of 7 Plague Marines, 2x20 Poxwalkers, a few HQ, 2 Blight Drones and a couple of Plagueburst Crawlers. In 10th that's dropped to around 1,500 points! 

 

I've been playing 10th, taking part in a campaign using Crusade rules - my army is at 1,600 points, but when it gets to 2,000 it'll be around 70 models. 

 

So, how wide is the points discrepancy now to older editions?  To illustrate what I've found, here's my 5th edition styled Space Marine demi-company that I painted during the first lockdown of the pandemic:

 

Looking online, according to the 5th Edition Marine Codex, that's 2,260 points. The same army in 10th (counting the Assault Squad as Assault Intercessors with Jump Packs) is 1,855 (without enhancements) - about 400 points cheaper! Some units (Tactical Squad, Chapter Master) are 100 points cheaper than their 5th Ed values; though vehicles are more expensive now, the reduction for infantry makes a big difference. 

 

Next year, when 11th drops, I wonder how we'll see points change again - will they increase so there's fewer models for potentially faster games? Further drops for bigger armies?

 

Whatever the changes, I'm a collector and painter first, so I doubt it'll affect my approach to the hobby. Apart from maybe taking longer to get an army fully painted..! 

So yeah this and my own example make it seem pretty clear between ‘old school’ (armor facings, strict FOC, templates, etc) and 10th armies have dropped any where between 200-500 points depending specific armies and editions.

 

i wouldn’t be surprised if they dropped points by 5-10% in 11th, or if they suggested the new ideal game size was 2500 while maintaining current point levels.

 

remember they initially wanted krieg engineers to be 35 pts for a squad of 5. Even at the current 70 points, they’re 12 points cheaper than what is their closest analogue in 3rd with similar armament, all while still being more effective than that 3rd Ed analogue.

Edited February 23 by Inquisitor_Lensoven

Ya, unshockingly points have gotten cheaper. Not using war gear costs for previous editions is pretty negligent, and basically makes the entire exercise a waste.

 

To build on @firestorm40k's marine army example, you would have had to pare down that army by 500-700 points to get a standard game sized list in 5th; 10th you need to add more to it to play 2000. It adds up to a large difference, especially when you combine it with the board size shrinking by almost 25%.

 

And people wonder why the game has been hyper lethal for a while. More models on both sides have been crammed into a smaller space.

Edited February 23 by SkimaskMohawk

On 2/22/2025 at 6:47 PM, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

I wasn’t in for 2nd but did it have the same platoon mechanic that followed in 3rd? Because this isn’t even a legal army in 3rd.

 

as far as model count, I do think that the guard might have shrunk on the lower end of games in 10th.

My current 2k list has around 60 infantry, 4 transports, and 3-4 russes. A basic FOC for 3rd could be as many as 55 infantry, but no less than 40 infantry and a chimera.

 

Kind of.  In 2nd, the mechanic was you had to have a Command HQ (colonel or captain), and then up to 3 squads of the same regimental type.  Each squad could include another unit as support, whether that was a different regimental unit or a tank, or a specialist squad.  You could have other Command Squads (lieutenant), who could have up to 3 infantry squads of the same regimental type, and each of those squads could have a support unit.  A unit's Chimera did not count as a Support Unit.  The points split was; up to 50% Command, 25%+ as Battleline, up to 25% support.

 

On 2/22/2025 at 9:41 PM, ZeroWolf said:

Before converting that list to tenth, how does that list compare to 3rd edition (thinking the 3.5 codex here specifically)? As the original post says, there would have been a cut in points just going from a skirmish game to an 'army' game.

 

Converting that list to Codex Cadians, aka IG 3.5 (and ignoring the FOC for 3.5) gives us:

- Command HQ (Heroic Senior Officer) = 239

- Cadian Infantry Squad = 76

- Cadian Heavy Weapons Squad = 90

- Ratlings = 55

- Leman Russ = 165

- Catachan Command Squad (Junior Officer) = 118

- Catachan Infantry Squad (Armoured Fist Squad) = 177

- Rough Riders = 47

Total = 967pts

 

Interestingly, the rules changes meant that you couldn't give veteran abilities to squads, psykers went from different grades to a single option, and various wargear options had their points slashed.  There's a load of other changes, but these directly affect the points.

Edited February 23 by Timberley

For me, skirmish is model v model rules, like necromunda and 2nd ed melee, while army is squad v squad rules, like 3rd onwards. 2nd ed was a kind of hybrid.

 

Anyway, that is OT.

 

I found this in the 6th ed rulebook:

 

 

In 6th ed at least, 2000pts is still classed as a 'large' game, while 1000-1500 is a few hours. We also have to remember the playtest setting of these games, where staffers are trying to steal a couple of hours in bugmans after work, or store games that were restricted to 2hrs max. From 6th ed at least, we can see that 2k games are not the norm, but placing them before 1000-1500pt games suggests that they are growing in importance. Maybe 7th ed was the test bed to see if people would want to play with larger armies, by initially giving them a free 500pts or so worth of stuff each game. 

+ Rogue Trader +

For interest and comparison to later editions, Rogue Trader intially had only this to say on points values:

 

... so really there was no expectation of army size at all, at least initially. This persisted through the edition, and though restrictions came in (see the extracts from the Space Marine and Imperial Guard army lists below), there's no explicit statement anywhere that I can find which gives a suggested size of army.

 

However, as you can see, the lists did allude to proportions and upper limits – as you can see from the fact that a Space Marine army was limited to 8 Tactical Squads and 2 Devastator Squads. A lot of these restrictions strike me as remaining more as guidance for a role-playing experience than formal guidelines for a competitive game. The limitations would give a theoretical maximum points value for an army (somewhere around 15,000–20,000pts), but they're so large that it's essentially meaningless in game terms. Such a game using the RT rules would take weeks!

 

 

+++

 

+ 2nd edition +

2nd edition was explicitly a cleaning-up and revision of Rogue Trader to make it possible to play balanced games, and so was the first place army size was referenced in an edition. 

 

Since my previous note about the 'Black Codex' implying a 2,000pt norm, I flicked through the 2nd edition rulebook to see whether there was any confirmation. It says:

 

So still no explicit statement about what's considered a 'normal game' army size, but alongside what it said in the Black Codex, I'd suggest 1,500–2,000pt is what the game designers were expecting. This is borne through by the battle reports of the time, which fit neatly within this range.

 

Army selection changed to percentage proportions for various unit types (Character, Troops etc.), and so like Rogue Trader, beyond a few 0–1 choices, overall army sizes were effectively limitless.

 

+++

 

+ 3rd edition +

The phrasing remains much the same, though we now get expected hours alongside the vaguer 'evening's gaming' phrasing:

 

 

... though we do get the Force Organisation chart, which makes a big difference. We're also given the very first 'Typical Space Marine army', which looks like this:

 

 

So here's our first idea of what the GW Studio expects an army to be.

+++

 

+ 10th edition +

Spooling on, and the phrasing has been tightened up and formalised, but the heart of it remains much the same. The game sizes have been given names: Incursion, Strike Force and Onsalught for games of to 1,000pts, 2,000pts, and 3,000pts respectively; and we're told that they will take a duration of 'up to 2/3/4 hours' in each case.

 

 

 

+++

 

+ Bigger models, smaller tables +

I'll also note here that larger individual model size and smaller suggested table size must influence how a game feels in terms of space. A modern marine is roughly twice the size of a RT/2nd ed. marine, for example, and is mounted on a larger 32mm base, rather than the old 25mm ones. Other armies have similarly got bigger, though not all to the same extent. 

 

At the same time, table sizes have got smaller. While similarly vague about table size as they are about army size, the RT, 2nd and 3rd edition rules all suggest that the game is most commonly played on an 8 x 4ft or 6 x 4ft board – that's 96 x 48in or 72 x 48in. Compare that with the suggested table sizes in 10th edition. A Strike Force battlefield is noted to be 60 x 44in – a foot less in width and four inches less deep than the smaller suggested table size, and a full three feet less than the bigger.

 

 

Edited February 24 by apologist

If we think about when a game would occur, and how long we would expect a casual game to last, 'an evening' is probably the level they're aiming at - 2-3 hours after work or school, or round at a friends house at the weekend. 1500 points taking "most of a day" for me would be the exception - a special day organised purely to play 40k, taken off work or at the weekend, and assuredly not a pickup game. They then go on to say how for "larger" (>1500pt) games you should maybe block off the whole weekend. This is very much the exception and would not be the norm at a 5 game tournament - which would take 10 days at 2 days per game. 

We don't get a 'typical army' in 10th, but we do get two armies set up on an example of a Strike Force battlefield – that is, a medium-sized 2,000pt game.

 

You can compare the Space Marine army here with the 3rd edition example above. Both represent what GW thinks a 'normal' game is in each edition – something intended to be played to conclusion in up to 3 hours.

 

It's interesting that the armies are so similar – lots of direct comparisions: 5 Terminators in each; 10 Tactical/Infernus; 5 Assault/Sternguard; Rhino/Impulsor; Razorback/[modern grav-tank whose name I forget]; Dreadnought/Dreadnought; Land Speeder/Land Speeder... Really, the main difference is that the bikes are replaced with a big tank; and the command group with the new heavy marines.

 

Overall, I think they look pretty damn close in size, but the physical space the models take up on the smaller board makes them look much bigger.

 

+++

 

What's the conclusion of all this? Well, if we can't compare points for points to work out a normal size game (and thus whether armies are getting bigger), we can perhaps look at the implicit messages that GW are giving us in each edition, and use 'time taken for a game' as the single thing that's remained consistent. From the examples here, I don't think GW's understanding of a normal game has fundamentally changed since 3rd edition.

It just seems pretty obvious that games have gotten larger, both in points sizes, as well as raw numbers of units/models.

Back of the envelope maths from the start of 3rd:

10 tacticals + rhino, ML, powerfist - 238

Chaplain - 75

5 terms, heavy flamer - 210

5 assault marines, power fist 150

dreadnought - 125

land speeder, mm 60

4 bikes,  power sword, melta, plasma - 172

Force commander with power fist - 85

command squad - 90

Razorback - 65

 

1270 pts. You can probably add in grenades, purity seals, veyeran sergeants, terminator honours etc to get it up to 1500 quite easily.  

 

Here's similar from the 3rd ed Blood Angels Codex. It's worth bearing in mind that many of the armies featured were from 2nd ed, and the descriptions match that. 2000pts is Gordon's *whole collection* for example. 

 

1 hour ago, apologist said:

We don't get a 'typical army' in 10th, but we do get two armies set up on an example of a Strike Force battlefield – that is, a medium-sized 2,000pt game.

 

You can compare the Space Marine army here with the 3rd edition example above. Both represent what GW thinks a 'normal' game is in each edition – something intended to be played to conclusion in up to 3 hours.

 

It's interesting that the armies are so similar – lots of direct comparisions: 5 Terminators in each; 10 Tactical/Infernus; 5 Assault/Sternguard; Rhino/Impulsor; Razorback/[modern grav-tank whose name I forget]; Dreadnought/Dreadnought; Land Speeder/Land Speeder... Really, the main difference is that the bikes are replaced with a big tank; and the command group with the new heavy marines.

 

Overall, I think they look pretty damn close in size, but the physical space the models take up on the smaller board makes them look much bigger.

 

+++

 

What's the conclusion of all this? Well, if we can't compare points for points to work out a normal size game (and thus whether armies are getting bigger), we can perhaps look at the implicit messages that GW are giving us in each edition, and use 'time taken for a game' as the single thing that's remained consistent. From the examples here, I don't think GW's understanding of a normal game has fundamentally changed since 3rd edition.

I mean I think that it’s close/similar between those two examples, but I think you’re doing a bit of minimization of the differences.

 

In the 10th army there’s 2 leaders/HQs.

both have light/medium armor, but 10th has a landraider equivalent.

 

i do think the repulsor and the points it fills out would make the armies appear to have much larger differences if  you filled out those points with another option.

replace that with 5 more infernus marines, and an invader ATV, and still have 5pts left over, and suddenly the 10th edition army looks notably different in composition than that older one.

 

i also want to say that the 10th edition army is also way more expensive to collect (subbing old RAS for modern JAIs, in modern costs not historical, etc.)

Edited February 24 by Inquisitor_Lensoven

4 hours ago, apologist said:

We don't get a 'typical army' in 10th, but we do get two armies set up on an example of a Strike Force battlefield – that is, a medium-sized 2,000pt game.

I did some quick list building with the current points. The Space Marines are about 1515 points (hard to pick out the exact Storm Speeder and Gladiator models). The Tyranids are 1565 points. I don't have an instinct to say this matches any point drops since the edition launched. I do find it hard to believe almost 500 points dropped. It seems more likely that 1500 points in Strike Force missions and battlefields was the intent.

Yea, "Strike Force" is any game up to 2000pts, not 2000pts exactly. 

52 minutes ago, jaxom said:

I did some quick list building with the current points. The Space Marines are about 1515 points (hard to pick out the exact Storm Speeder and Gladiator models). The Tyranids are 1565 points. I don't have an instinct to say this matches any point drops since the edition launched. I do find it hard to believe almost 500 points dropped. It seems more likely that 1500 points in Strike Force missions and battlefields was the intent.

Gladiator and speeder both look like the dakka variants to me.

On 2/19/2025 at 1:15 PM, apologist said:

@Arikel Can you remember roughly how many models were in that 1,500pt list for 5th – and likewise how many are in your ‘normal’ list today?

 

I don't have any lists ready or that I could find from prev years, but I took the time to point out my full painted unit roster in points from 5th, 6th, 8th, and 9th codex points, plus I used what I believe is the last MFM update prior to the codex for 10th (my army is mostly first born, I don't have primaris units fully ready to play). Overall there is a downward trend in the total value of my collection, with the exception of 9th, which was perhaps a tactic to suppress FB usage (at least in tourney's anyways) by making them more expensive vis-a-vis comparable primaris units. In general, points have gone down, sometimes quite sharply, for infantry and HQ units, while vehicle points have risen, though not enough to make up the difference when looking at total value. Essentially it is generally possible to squeeze in either extra hq or even squads into a 5th edition list to make it to the same points in 10th, as well as more killy stuff in those squads due to fixed points costs. So more boots on the table, plus likely more killy stuff in those boots, regardless of the points total used for the game itself.

 

3rd Company & Auxiliaries roster

Unit Name                      5th        6th        8th        9th        10th

Tac Squad Baldarius       170        170        164        200        160
ML, Flamer, 10 men

 

Tac Squad Yammoto      190        190        179        210        160
ML, Melta, 10 Men
P. Pistol

 

Tac Squad Ezekiel           210        215        191        225        160

P. Cannon, P. Gun, 10 Men
PF, Combi Plas

 

Dev Squad MacDougall  270        210        230        230        200
2 LC, 2 HB, 10 Men

 

Assault Squad Bors         130        125        84        100        115
Plasma Pistol, 5 Men
Power Axe

 

Captain Artur                  130        125        78        90        90
PS, Bolt Gun(MC)
Art Armor if there

 

Chaplain Wladiswlaw      135        110        Illegal LO    115        80
Bike

 

Techmarine Alexei           80        80        52        75        70
Power Axe, P. Pistol

 

VGV Squad Thorvald       235        253        173        168        120(5 man)
RB, Power Sword
Twin PF, Twin LC
3 CS+BP, 7 man

 

Rhino "Arikel"                 35        35        72        80        75

 

As Razorback                  50        60        67        115        100
HB, SB

 

LRR "Devon's Wrath"      250        245        246        290        260
SB

 

DreadNaught Bobertus   105        100        70        125        135
MM, SB, DCCW

 

Librarian Tyrell                 100        65        93        90        75
Force Staff, BP

 

Command Squad            175        Illegal LO    53        53        165
PF+Flamer, Bp+CS

 

Ancient Ricardo               incl        ILO        63        75        incl
Banner, CS

 

Apothecary Anton           incl        ILO        55        75        incl

 

Champion Gregor           incl        ILO        40        55        incl
the Giant Killer

 

Scout Squad Antonio      90        80        90        90        65
snipers, camo cloaks

 

Termi Squad Tyrone        230        225        180        215        190

 

Totals:                             2585        2288         2180        2676        2220

 

Tried to make this more or less readable, sorry the columns don't line up very well

4 hours ago, Arikel said:

Unit Name                      5th        6th        8th        9th        10th

Tac Squad Baldarius       170        170        164        200        160
ML, Flamer, 10 men

 

Interesting to see! Was it 4th ed in which all models got free grenades and pistols, or 5th? In 3rd, tacs didnt have pistols and you had to buy them separately, so this tac squad in 3rd, identically armed, would be 203pts (15ppm, 1ppm for frags, 2ppm for kraks, 10pts for the ML, 3pts for the flamer, 10pts to make the serge veteran for an extra attack like 4th onwards, otherwise he had an identical profile to the squad).

to be honest, wasn´t 10th supposed to be "the simple way to play"? 

Then we keep getting all kinda strats, command point re-rolls with everything and dozen units with different abilities. ETC...

and with every new release of the army, we keep getting new units, so of course it would bloat any army that keeps getting new codex and rules, right?