Will 3k point games become the new norm?

[Marshal Loss]

Stream on right now pretty clearly debunked the idea that 3k will be replacing 2k. The change in points terms simply isn't as large as some seem to be assuming

[Zephaniah Adriyen]

I'm looking forward to the points changes - I can play 2k games, but smaller.

My favorite category is 500-point casual, but a lot of the players at my FLGS like to play up at 2k - so I play up at 2k. The points hikes will reduce the amount of models in those 2k games, thus letting me play a smaller game by default.

[Dark Shepherd]

Anyone else dreading every time templates gets brought up?

 

If they think a 2k game will be up to 3 hours (8th rulebook said 2 to 3) it cant be that much of a scalecreep/reduction in model count

[Tyriks]

When 8th launched, all my 2k games did go by in 2 hours.  I don't think it ever took three.  It was only after codices started coming out they started taking longer because people were looking up strats more (and to some extent the rules are more spaced out in the codex compared to index so it can take longer to find the unit you want to reference).  But now games take over 3 hours regularly so if it's down to 3 I'll be glad.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Wow we are getting way off topic now .

[battle captain corpus]

-][- THE TOPIC AT HAND IS WILL 3000 POINTS BE THE NORMAL FORMAT: DISCUSS. NOT HOW FAST YOU CAN FLIP OUT A TEMPLATE OR THE SPEED PLAYERS CAN ROLL DICE ETC.-][-

 

If you want to discuss those points feel free to start your own thread/topic obviously.

 

BCC

Edited June 7, 2020 by battle captain corpus

[Shagah]

Black Blow Fly, don’t you mean that you expect the new standard game will be 2001 points? Maybe 2100? You said people will want to do Onslaught just for the maximum command points. 2001 points gets you Onslaught.

 

18cp / 2001 points is actually bigger than 18cp / 3000 points

 

 

Almost for this reason alone (the fact that 2001pts triggers a move to Onslaught) you can see Tournaments maxing out at 2000pts, as once you get to Onslaught you are supposed to have bigger tables which makes physical room an issue. So yeah, while I might play 3000pts with my friends (we always like playing the largest game we have time for), I just do not see it at events.

[mughi3]

 

Black Blow Fly, don’t you mean that you expect the new standard game will be 2001 points? Maybe 2100? You said people will want to do Onslaught just for the maximum command points. 2001 points gets you Onslaught.

 

18cp / 2001 points is actually bigger than 18cp / 3000 points

 

 

Almost for this reason alone (the fact that 2001pts triggers a move to Onslaught) you can see Tournaments maxing out at 2000pts, as once you get to Onslaught you are supposed to have bigger tables which makes physical room an issue. So yeah, while I might play 3000pts with my friends (we always like playing the largest game we have time for), I just do not see it at events.

 

It's all speculation now anyway since TOs get to decide their own rules outside of GWs control.   And most players play at a local shop, tourneys are few and far between by comparison. the general play attitude will vary on what each local group of players wants. 

 

i know people who will want more stuff on the table,  so with the increased points costs,  going into onslaught will be a no-brainer move. 

 

Of course it probably won't matter much to me since only a few of our regulars are hardcore GW  cultists. i enjoyed using 8th for epic scale play and it was fun when you basically ignore most stratagems and CP farming at that level (we are talking the equivalent of 10K points). 

 

From what i have seen of 9th i won't be playing it. GW is doubling down on many of the problems in 8th, i will wait and watch, maybe it will improve. in the mean time i have 8 other systems i have minis for i can play along with going back and playing 5th  with my local group or even horus heresy(a far better game than 8th IMHO for normal scale play). 

[Fajita Fan]

A higher point game doesn’t necessarily take longer. A higher point game with new newer players using horde armies trying to space every model 2” apart to avoid templates will take forever. I’ve seen experienced people play high point elite armies really fast.

 

If points go up I can see higher point games become the norm but I’d love for the rules scale down to be fun at low point games (and maybe this is where the next version of Kill Team could come in so maybe that’s not a priority). I used to play low point games of WHFB 8th edition and the rules just weren’t fun, the game wasn’t designed for it.

 

I was wondering this weekend what percentage of points you guys think should be casualties in a game. What I mean is should the game be deadlier overall (and maybe quicker overall) in order to speed play at higher points? If things die quicker then turns should speed up as you go so it would make sense that the game would start at a higher points level.

 

In Adeptus Titanicus it may look crazy to see two 2000 point legios face off but in those games titans start getting destroyed FAST. By turn 3 you could have a lot of Warlords or Reavers getting knocked out and what started as a high point game becomes a low point game in the last few turns.

 

If 9th edition has deadlier guns, less saves, and faster casualty rules then even 3000 point games can move quickly because things are dying quicker. If that’s the case it would be logical to think GW would push higher point games in tournaments.

[MARK0SIAN]

I think the worst thing they could do for the game would be to make it any more deadlier. Stuff just evaporates as it is, even stuff that’s meant to be tanky and tough. People sometimes complain about 30K and the fact that you’re removing fistfuls of marines at a time but it’s got nothing on 8th edition.

 

I’m sincerely hoping that the changes for 9th actually make the game less deadly, whether deliberately or stealthily through better terrain rules.

[DanPesci]

I think the worst thing they could do for the game would be to make it any more deadlier. Stuff just evaporates as it is, even stuff that’s meant to be tanky and tough. People sometimes complain about 30K and the fact that you’re removing fistfuls of marines at a time but it’s got nothing on 8th edition.

 

I’m sincerely hoping that the changes for 9th actually make the game less deadly, whether deliberately or stealthily through better terrain rules.

 

Same, too many games I see are currently done by turn 2/3. This obvsiouly needs balanced against the time it takes to play as I dont want games going on longer....just that by turn 4/5 you still have meaningul stuff to do in the game.

 

As for the OP, do i think onslaught will become the new norm? No. 

 

Points changes seem more to shift it back to 2k being around what was 1750/1850. GW wants/needs new players, making you have to have tons of models to achieve a 'normal' game size makes no sense to me/would be counterproductive to decreasing the points in the first place.

 

If there was a shift away from the 2k level being the norm, Id actually expect them to go the other way to better facilitate newer players and faster games, but I honestly think 2k will just stay as the norm/tournament standard.

[Fajita Fan]

I think the worst thing they could do for the game would be to make it any more deadlier. Stuff just evaporates as it is, even stuff that’s meant to be tanky and tough. People sometimes complain about 30K and the fact that you’re removing fistfuls of marines at a time but it’s got nothing on 8th edition.

 

I’m sincerely hoping that the changes for 9th actually make the game less deadly, whether deliberately or stealthily through better terrain rules.

This is what I’m wondering, how many points should be left at turns 5-6? With a pair of take-all-comers traditional lists (not a min/max List of the Month) should there be roughly 25% left of the armies at the end of turn 4? 50%?

 

In AoS weapons that do multiple damage carry over to other models in a unit, in 40k they do not so what if that changes? In older editions pistols couldn’t be fired in close combat and units couldn’t split fire, now they can (with plasma pistols being actually useful now!) so the shooting phase is more efficient. Combat resolution means more units fall apart quicker from morale and supposedly tanks won’t get tar pitted as easily now.

 

As points go up I think they’re going to hope for bigger armies because games with 3000 points per side will become 2000 points fairly quickly if the game gets deadlier. I’ll always be cynical as to GW’s motivations with respect to sales and I’d be stunned if they don’t want to incentivize the existing player base to buy more models. If they change weapon damage carrying over to other models in the unit we’ll probably see more lascannons scything the field like lightsabers.

 

To your point about newer players I really do hope the game scales well to smaller games.

Edited June 8, 2020 by Fajita Fan

[ThePenitentOne]

 

Black Blow Fly, don’t you mean that you expect the new standard game will be 2001 points? Maybe 2100? You said people will want to do Onslaught just for the maximum command points. 2001 points gets you Onslaught.

 

18cp / 2001 points is actually bigger than 18cp / 3000 points

 

 

Almost for this reason alone (the fact that 2001pts triggers a move to Onslaught) you can see Tournaments maxing out at 2000pts, as once you get to Onslaught you are supposed to have bigger tables which makes physical room an issue. So yeah, while I might play 3000pts with my friends (we always like playing the largest game we have time for), I just do not see it at events.

 

 

This may be how some folks interpret the game size guidelines, but not me; I round the way would any other number: 2001-2499 = 2k game on 2k table.

2501-2999 = 3k game on 3k table.

 

Actually, for me it's going to be different, because I'm building a table surface of 15" square tiles; this allows me to increase by Increments of 15 rather than 30, which means I can have a table size for Incursion rather than playing on a Combat Patrol Table, and it means I also have a middle table between Strikeforce and Onslaught.

 

Again though, I get that when you play in public spaces with strangers, you have to compromise, and some folks would be reluctant to do things that aren't explicitly spelled out in the rules no matter how much sense those ideas actually make.

[Rik Lightstar]

I don't think 3k or any other Onslaught game will be the new "standard" in fact if GW and FLG Stores are smart they'll have rolling quarterly cycles of 500 > 1000 > 1500 >2000 point games through the year starting in January for that SWEEEET Christmas Kick Start.

 

Convincing any gamer to start a new army nets you WAY more sales than getting them to add a unit or two to an existing one.

 

Even if "most" people only do a new army every other year that's still a big boost.

 

Rik

[Kain Mor]

People keep acting like the point changes are going to be permanent as a deliberate attempt to shrink armies. I think it is far more likely that they’re just resetting the point deflation that happened all through 8th, and than ChapterApproved (or however they handle point changes now - hopefully more than once a year) will see the points slowly plummet again to about where they are now.

[Chaeron]

I used to play 30k which typically runs at 3000-3500 points... those were some really fun games to spend an afternoon .

 

This is absolutely what I've been used to playing too In Heresy, and 3k for me feels 'standard' now. Whilst I appreciate it's not just directly porting across experiences between games, I imagine it'll be similar in so far as once the rules are down 'off pat' for both players it naturally makes it quicker and smoother. I can imagine tournaments not necessarily going that large, if only to ensure games are finished, but I think it gives scope for larger, quicker games depending on the adjustments made - and continuing to have that variable experience based on size and scope.

[tychobi]

2k is what the tournament organizers will start with. They usually set the pace. Personally I am stoked about 1k play. Less room for error and more room for glory! Also I am too old to play till 4am these days

[Fajita Fan]

I don't think 3k or any other Onslaught game will be the new "standard" in fact if GW and FLG Stores are smart they'll have rolling quarterly cycles of 500 > 1000 > 1500 >2000 point games through the year starting in January for that SWEEEET Christmas Kick Start.

 

Convincing any gamer to start a new army nets you WAY more sales than getting them to add a unit or two to an existing one.

 

Even if "most" people only do a new army every other year that's still a big boost.

 

Rik

The resisted this for so long with WHFB it was insane how expensive it was to make even a 1500 point infantry-based army in that game. $40 for one box of troops when you need 6 or 8 boxes just to start was a big turnoff. Smaller point game accessibility is one of the reasons I thought 40k overtook WHFB but GW refused to make infantry cheaper. I can’t tell you how expensive my Lizardmen army was for sure but it was a lot more expensive than most of the 40k armies I started at similar points values. I wonder if more elite units (like terminators or tanks) will see an even higher points increase which could push game points level higher.

 

I’m laughing at the idea of “GW game point inflation” right now. :D

[Panzer]

People keep acting like the point changes are going to be permanent as a deliberate attempt to shrink armies. I think it is far more likely that they’re just resetting the point deflation that happened all through 8th, and than ChapterApproved (or however they handle point changes now - hopefully more than once a year) will see the points slowly plummet again to about where they are now.

 

Unfortunately that's most likely the truth. Would be nice if games would be permanently reduced in size, however GW will quickly go back to how they did things this edition and just keep reducing points as a means to balance things.