Why 3000 points?

[Valkyrion]

I had the rules for HH1.0 but never actually played a game, though I did play 40k 7th, and HH2.0 is very much in its gaming infancy with me and mine. 

40k, Sigmar and WFB before it were 'standard' 1500/1850/2000 points for most of their lives, IIRR.

So is HH designed to be an all nighter with your mates rather than an afternoon at your local store? Or is it deceptively speedy once you get going? 

[SkimaskMohawk]

This one gets a bit subjective.

The official recommended points range has always been 1750-3500, though even 1750 is too low due to how high base unit costs tend to be (though I think this changed a bit with 2nd). 

Imo, 2500 is the sweet spot where you can take some interesting unit combinations, but are still restricted; you have to actually make decisions about your list and balance scoring with offensive power. It's very much an extension of 5th edition for me, and those games were traditionally played at 1500-1850 for the same reasons. 

But, most people don't share those concepts; they want to have a big spectacle with the friends and use all their toys. So 3000 is the minimum they play, and I know a lot of British people considered 3250 the standard in 1st so they could literally take any lord of war/primarch they wanted, along with a rather substantial list.

The best answer to your question is "both". It can be a tight game experience that can be knocked out in 2 hours of focussed play, and it can also be a long event with the friends.

Edited July 6, 2022 by SkimaskMohawk

[Noserenda]

Personally i recently preferred smaller games because they ruled out some of the more awkward bits of 7th but second edition may well smooth that down too. We have played all sizes over the years, even some regular 10k games with minimal super heavies but they really were all day/weekend affairs, these days we are all too old and tied up in things to do that often, plus theres epic for the real spectacle games! :) 

[Orange Knight]

The units in 30k are expensive. To thematically illustrate a Legion at war, ( even in a small snippet of a battlefield) you need to field big squads of Astartes, Terminators and the larger vehicles that flank them.

Add a Primarch or a single Lord of War, and the army ends up in the region of 3k points or higher before it takes shape as a cohesive and thematic force.

Edited July 6, 2022 by Orange Knight

[Noserenda]

16 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

The units in 30k are expensive. To thematically illustrate a Legion at war, ( even in a small snippet of a battlefield) you need to field big squads of Astartes, Terminators and the larger vehicles that flank them.

Add a Primarch or a single Lord of War, and the army ends up in the region of 3k points or higher before it takes shape as a cohesive and thematic force.

I mean you could say exactly the same thing about 40k, hell any 28mm wargame. Like i said above, if you want a grand sweep, check out smaller scales where it really works. In the meantime you can still run a platoon sized game at 1000pts and ramp up from there. 

I am quite curious to see if they can make Primarchs a bit more fun in 2nd.

[SkimaskMohawk]

26 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

The units in 30k are expensive. To thematically illustrate a Legion at war, ( even in a small snippet of a battlefield) you need to field big squads of Astartes, Terminators and the larger vehicles that flank them.

Add a Primarch or a single Lord of War, and the army ends up in the region of 3k points or higher before it takes shape as a cohesive and thematic force.

The irony is that 30k units were cheaper than their equivalents in early 6th when the rules were originally released.

Its the massive decrease in points over the editions (and raising the standard game size from 1500 to 2000) that makes 30k armies feel so expensive points-wise. 

And claiming that thematic armies are the big spectacle lists is frankly wrong, and you certainly don't need to spend 3000 points before it "takes shape".

[Valkyrion]

Only 5 replies in and this is already making me want to ask more questions!

How long do HH players want their game to be?

40k says 1 hour for 500 points, 2 hours for this size, 3 hours for that, which can work if you're both au fait with every nuance of the rules, but in reality takes twice as long (at least in my experience). 

So forgetting points for a minute (though I know that points are a factor in game length), is HH good for a 3 hour gaming experience, or does it want to be  6 hours, or is even that too difficult to answer?

[Dont-Be-Haten]

22 minutes ago, Valkyrion said:

Only 5 replies in and this is already making me want to ask more questions!

How long do HH players want their game to be?

40k says 1 hour for 500 points, 2 hours for this size, 3 hours for that, which can work if you're both au fait with every nuance of the rules, but in reality takes twice as long (at least in my experience). 

So forgetting points for a minute (though I know that points are a factor in game length), is HH good for a 3 hour gaming experience, or does it want to be  6 hours, or is even that too difficult to answer?

I mean it kind of goes with the flow. I've had 2k games take all day, and then I've gotten a 2k game finished in about 1.5 ~ 2.5 hours. 

30k isn't any different than 40k. The first few games will take longer when you are learning to play. I always suggest small games when you're first starting out. The most time consuming part of 30k is looking at LoS, facings, and rules. 

I feel like a 4-6k 2,000~3,000 per side is about the same speed as older 40k games versus the mass casualties they offset in 8th and 9th.

[SkimaskMohawk]

51 minutes ago, Valkyrion said:

Only 5 replies in and this is already making me want to ask more questions!

How long do HH players want their game to be?

40k says 1 hour for 500 points, 2 hours for this size, 3 hours for that, which can work if you're both au fait with every nuance of the rules, but in reality takes twice as long (at least in my experience). 

So forgetting points for a minute (though I know that points are a factor in game length), is HH good for a 3 hour gaming experience, or does it want to be  6 hours, or is even that too difficult to answer?

3 hours is more than enough when you're familiar with the rules, unless you're playing one giant game. 

Shooting doesn't take nearly as long, melee locks units so there's less to move, armour is all or nothing, and there's no sequencing to carefully consider for fight order.

All my 2000 point games of 40k have lasted a lot longer than my 30k games, from 2500 to 3500.

[MegaVolt87]

Pre 7th ed, I could get games of 2k< done in under 2 hrs often less, I estimate HH 3k pts to take no more than 3 hrs. It also depends on what the other guy is doing. My old play group didn't stand around procrastinating, they were already reaching for their models just as I would wrap my turn and just go. It helps when both players can make snap judgements and roll on while being effective. Talk about your lists and how they work pre-game if asked, designate all the terrain types before deployment. Its such a waste of time arguing about terrain during a game. If you disagree on LOS, unit/ vehicle facing etc, roll off on it and move on.  If its a rule thats not quickly referenceable, roll off and look it up post game to save time. You can easily spend 10+ minutes alone looking for something like that in the rules alone. 

EDIT- Also 3k points because I spend so much $$$ on all this stuff I want to use it all at once and 3k lets me do that 

Edited July 6, 2022 by MegaVolt87

[Marshal Mittens]

I like the idea of 3500 to 4000 points on an 8x6 table. 120+ bodies per side, a few tanks and dreads. 

 

I'm ok with playing lower points though. 

[SkimaskMohawk]

You can literally do that in 2500 lol. 1200 for 120 tacs/despoilers, 400 for a couple of dreads, 400 for three preds or so, 500 left over for characters and whatever other units or upgrades you want.

 

[corvus.calvariam]

2.5k has definitely been the go to for my group, though we began branching out to 3k at the tail end of 1st edition. 2.5k felt like a good spot in terms of game size and diversity of units, and the idea was that we could simply add a Primarch to our lists to bump things up to 3k. We never did though as none of us had much interest in fielding a Primarch and I always ended up using the extra points for more firepower.

[Brofist]

9 hours ago, Valkyrion said:

Only 5 replies in and this is already making me want to ask more questions!

How long do HH players want their game to be?

40k says 1 hour for 500 points, 2 hours for this size, 3 hours for that, which can work if you're both au fait with every nuance of the rules, but in reality takes twice as long (at least in my experience). 

So forgetting points for a minute (though I know that points are a factor in game length), is HH good for a 3 hour gaming experience, or does it want to be  6 hours, or is even that too difficult to answer?

My group was smashing out 2-3K games in about 3-4hrs. However we typically played ZM at 1K or so. Those games took about an hour and a half. New edition is less lethal and you take more stuff (plus new rules) so its gonna play slower for a while.

[Rejects of Anvilus]

In 1.0 we would comfortably be able to do 2.5-3k in under two and a half hours. 3k was always a sweet spot as it allowed you to take most things (not the biggest LoW, but most of the them) and make your force play how you what it to.  Larger games do take longer, but they are more fun, a 5k game would take about four hours or so. We do have a 20 player game with 5k per player plus titans booked for November and we reckon that should take about eight hours or so…

[Bung]

13 hours ago, Valkyrion said:

I had the rules for HH1.0 but never actually played a game, though I did play 40k 7th, and HH2.0 is very much in its gaming infancy with me and mine. 

40k, Sigmar and WFB before it were 'standard' 1500/1850/2000 points for most of their lives, IIRR.

So is HH designed to be an all nighter with your mates rather than an afternoon at your local store? Or is it deceptively speedy once you get going? 

 

Its pretty simple smaller games lead to hard choices in list building, you may lack options to deal with some enemy units or have other weaknessses.

The more points the more well rounded is your list to counter all treaths.

 

[Sparika]

I've not played much but I had fun games a 750-1200 points. It's more skirmish but it was interesting to learn the game and learn the units (mechanicum vs dark angels).

[Canadian_F_H]

In HH1 my local group pretty much defaulted to 3000pt armies.  And we would frequently do 2vs2 games.  We could usually get thru a whole game in 6 hours.  

But I've hammered out games in 3hrs. Once knocked out a full 6 turns, 3000pt game in 2 hrs with almost no survivors on the table.  

Not sure if that's going to work out in HH2, but if you want to bring any of the really cool LoWs and primarchs it's really hard to make a viable army below 3k pts.

Local group is thinking we might go as high as 4000 for 1vs1 games.  And team games will probably stay 3000 per player.

[N1SB]

On 7/7/2022 at 1:48 AM, Valkyrion said:

I had the rules for HH1.0 but never actually played a game, though I did play 40k 7th, and HH2.0 is very much in its gaming infancy with me and mine.

Brother Valkyrion, I was in your exact position when I started out in HH 1.0, because it determined how much I needed to buy/paint before even my 1st game.  I thought at the time it was an arbitrary thing set by my local meta, but reading everyone's responses here made me realise it just works out that way.  I'll just lay it out what others said by points:

• The rules actually suggest not taking a Lord of War until 2,000 points
• Primarchs are LoWs, which is what motivated a lot of players to play 30k
• So 2,000 points is the starting point, but a Primarch himself is ~500 points
• 30k has expensive units, a typical Elite unit, decked out, is ~500 points
• Thus, to fulfill the Force Organisation Chart with a Primarch and some units, it just kinda generally averages out to 2,500 to 3,000 points

Very organically and independently, I ended up with a Mechanicum + Iron Hands force that was about 1,500 + 1,000 points, around the 2,500 points sweet spot that I'm finding everyone here talking about.  In our meta we played a lot of joint 2 vs. 2 games and it usually works out 3,000 points aside.

But as what you should aim for in your own army planning, I would collaborate with your meta for a starting point, ease your way into 2,500 points is probably the most fun way to play.  Maybe agree with everyone doing 1,000 points, then gradually grow together, looking forward to when everyone gets their Primarch or signature Lord of War.

[Chaeron]

On 7/7/2022 at 7:32 AM, spinitron said:

In 1.0 we would comfortably be able to do 2.5-3k in under two and a half hours. 3k was always a sweet spot as it allowed you to take most things (not the biggest LoW, but most of the them) and make your force play how you what it to.  Larger games do take longer, but they are more fun, a 5k game would take about four hours or so. We do have a 20 player game with 5k per player plus titans booked for November and we reckon that should take about eight hours or so…

I’d definitely echo this: two players with a good knowledge of the game can really motor through it, whilst having a blast! Those are the sort of timings I’d expect for tournament or narrative games over a day or a weekend to keep things flowing. Interesting to see whether that’ll be the same with 2.0 - I imagine it will be!