Favorite Sized Game

[Krautcommander47]

I would just like to know what peoples favorite sized games are.

I play from 500-1000 most of the time anymore but my favorites must
be the 500 point game, it is a decent size but does not take 4-6 hours to play
like the thousand point games of which I have played about 10.

[Colonel_Coo]

I would just like to know what peoples favorite sized games are.

I play from 500-1000 most of the time anymore but my favorites must
be the 500 point game, it is a decent size but does not take 4-6 hours to play
like the thousand point games of which I have played about 10.

200pts are good for tactical play: 30 unit restriction.

300-100-100 games are fun as well. 300pts vechicles, 100pts planes, 100pts infantry. Point balancing allowed (i.e 295pts Veh, 107 pts AC, 98pt infantry) Limits 15 Infantry units. 3x3 map.

Quick games with 2 maps and 50pts 8unit limits are nice as well.

100pts are more common for time restrictions.

[Rick]

I have played a few 1000 pt. games and found them enjoyable so long as the goal of the game is clear and interesting. Games that are a simple 'blow 'em up' have gotten a bit boring for me.

I've found the smaller games much more enjoyable, 100 to 200 pts. In fact the club I usually play at is going through a 'Campagin Series' and so far for the last 5 months our games have been year limited (1939) and point limited to 50 pts with only two games larger than that (one 60 pt. and one 80 pt.).

What I find enjoyable is having to craft my force, picking and choosing which units to do what. What units give the best bang for the buck? So far my core force looks like this:

1 SS Haup. 7 pts.
2 Mauser Kar 6 pts.
2 SS Storm 14 pts.
2 Fallsch. 16 pts.

With those units as my core, I'll drop one or two of those and add in either the 81 mm Mortar, the Nebelwerfer, Pzr 38, or the Elite Pzr.

Rick

[Nalleman]

I like campaing play, where differently sized armies meet, for example 160 vs 240.

[Uncle_Joe]

Yep, I'm with Rick on this one. I find the smaller games FAR more interesting and challenging. We usually stick to 100-150 point games.

The huge games just become dice-fests IMO. There is usually very little scope for actual maneuver...you just move forward and roll your dice. Some of the pictures I've seen here of people's huge games just leave me baffled as to how they can be any fun...the boards are often coated wall to wall with units 2-3 hexes deep! No thanks! :)

In the smaller games, you have to make much better use of the limited forces you have available. There tends to be more room to maneuver so you have to carefully consider your moves.

Luckily, people can play however they enjoy the most! Thats the joy of point-based systems.

[oddfellow]

I think that 200 points is the sweet spot for build options, game time, and tactical maneuvering.

[Krautcommander47]

I do enjoy some of the smaller games, but I have been playing them for 2 years so i enjoy the large ones with multiple objectives.

[Qmark]

Five Thousand.
I've only done it once (with a 3'x8' folding table entirely covered in map), but it was some fun.

[Uncle_Joe]

Only 5000? Bah! If you arent modeling all of WW2 on a man to man scale using A&AM then you simply arent trying hard enough! :p

[Qmark]

I, uh, happen to be short of about 50000 Sherman tanks for that.

[Richter von Manthofen]

What you have 5000 Shermans :O


BTW I prefer 100 pts - but I lie do do campaigns wher the outcome of one battle determines the war...

[CaptainHans]

100 points are my favorite. I also enjoy 100 point team games where each side may have 300 points but also have 3 players per side controlling 100 points each. But I must admit I havn't played anything larger than that. But I have watched big games and just got bored as the movement phase entered its 3rd quarter.

[Cpt. John Miller]

I think that 120 points is perfect.
Enough so that you can play with an expensive piece and still have points left to flesh out your force. You can play a plane with confidence, or some support units. I just feel that those extra 20 points give your build the right amount of synergy while forcing you to make some tough choices, you can get a lot for 120 points but you can't have it all. What I mean is that there is always some nice pieces that you are forced to leave out which is seldom the case for 150 points and up.

[Lotus]

My favorite?

Probably 200 pts. That's if you're talking one on one.

That said, anything involving team play is my real favorite.
300+pts is where I believe this begins. 1000+pts team play is better still. Add in rules that regulate or limit the communication/contact between friendly players' forces and things really get interesting.

Of course, in terms of team play, you have to pretty much commit a day.

[OIFvet]

Tough call on what my favorite point limit game is. I enjoy the 100 point infantry with limited armor support game, but I also enjoy the 200 point-plus combined arms epic battles. I think it really boils down to just what I am in the mood for (or what battle tickets are available :rolleyes: ). I am just happy to play my one night a week.:)

[Qmark]

I am just happy to play my one night a week.:)It's just too bad Leawood is just a tad out of my range. It's also too bad this game didn't exist five years ago, when I was haunting the BattleZone in Overland Park.

[NorthernRommel]

I have to agree with Joe on this one. If your going to play wall to wall tanks and dicefest then go play Warhammer.

As a general rule the number of maps determine our maximum team points per side. No more then 50pts per map. Much more maneuver and tactical play at that scale.

[Qmark]

No more then 50pts per map. You might be on to something here.

[DCal12]

I've found the smaller games much more enjoyable, 100 to 200 pts. In fact the club I usually play at is going through a 'Campagin Series' and so far for the last 5 months our games have been year limited (1939) and point limited to 50 pts with only two games larger than that (one 60 pt. and one 80 pt.).



Rick

Some of the most fun games I have played have put year restrictions on them forcing you to use units you may not normally use.

[Tripwire]

150-200 points. Some "exotic" units, maybe aircraft, done in a reasonable amount of time.

[TIGGERR]

500 to 2000 are the best games for quick play but our group mostly plays 10,000pt plus games. Thats usually on 6' by 18' table and played over 2 weekends whenever everyone can get together. We use real world maps for area location and to show location of each others troops. Each table reps. a front line of about 500Km long and 175Km deep on the real world map. We just agree on the ratio of each maps that can be placed on the table.

[horacus]

I like 300+ games with 4 or more players.

[Volorkey]

My local game store has around 4 players so we like to do 200-300 point games with the points split between 2 players on each side.

[Lotus]

The bigger team games DO have good tactics available if people choose to employ them. A creative scenario designer can make things especially interesting. Each player, after all, looks after not only himself but also after the needs of others on his side...ultimately to meet the objective, whatever it may be.

They're not all just tank/dice battles. Though there is something to be said for the occasional gratuitous venture. ;) Personally, I like combined forces in my team games.