Hi all thought I'd bring my thoughts on the new LW points level to the discussion table.
Firstly this appears (at time of writing) to be the new points level - at the Welsh open in June they said this is their plan for 2015, and corrivalry are going to 1800 too.
But, is it too much?
Whilst an increase from 1750 ( points value two years ago iirc) to 1800 may not seem like much I think it is deceptively big. Take for example one of the new Remagen big cat lists, whilst 50 points might not buy you anything, 65 points could get you that static AA you were missing, or 70 points those RT nebs to chuck smoke at the opposition - personally I like having an incomplete force, the decision to decide which base not to cover can make a tournament far more interesting and exciting. Last year at BA2, I could not get AA for my Volksgrenadiers, in 4 of the 5 games that decision paid off, in the other game I was punished!
Yes for some people the extra points may just be 'another bazooka' etc, but I think 1800 gives some lists that extra space to optimise whilst disadvantaging lists which max out at other points levels (look at those LW Italians - you can not pay for any better support much after 1650 for instance!)
 |
| the sort of table you really don't want to play on |
The other issues though I think are more important. Firstly table size, when I was at the Euro GT I noticed a 40K apocalypse game on a table, it had about 6 aside, and was played over 3-4 6 by 4 tables - but with so many models it was just two lines shooting each other (with the odd flyer in the middle) no manoeuvring at all! I fear the larger the game of FoW the larger the table we need to allow forces to move and react - otherwise what's the point in even having a movement stat?
The second one is game time, at the recent BAMW 1 day, I played three games with my finnish infantry, against tankovy, panzer pioneers and Italian infantry - or lots of tanks, elite infantry, hoard infantry - every game almost went to time - same at many LW events - when using an infantry force (especially against another infantry force) 2.5 hours is pretty tight to get a game in, you need to press as the attacker from the start - with 1800 points I think you really need 3 hour rounds.
 |
| is time running out? |
Then finally there is the cynical reason - is this increase there to make us buy more models? Logically higher points = more models, but most people have more models than in their 'tournament list' and even if you buy another unit - I don't think that's a problem, it just gives you more options - I'm looking forward for example to the next LW book, as with a blister or two extra I'll hopefully have a whole new German force to play with.
Anyway, I would love to hear you guys thoughts on 1800 points for LW, and how you think it will/won't affect the game.
1800pts is way too much. Real men (and the better sort of girls, if I may borrow from HG Wells) play low! :-) Seriously though, I've found 1250-1350pt games far more challenging, interesting and enjoyable. Less is more in my humble opinion :-)
ReplyDeleteI agree that having to make choices on what you can take makes more interesting lists. The difficulty with too low points values I find is that extreme lists become more dominant
DeleteAt my local shop we generally play 1750 most people seem happy with it. I do think the higher points will cause a problem in competitive games where time is a factor. In a Friendly game it won't matter a few years ago we used to play 2000 point games but we dropped it so you had to do with out something. Looking at the official BF lists I honestly though there was a typo and the early and late war points had gotten flipped. Given the cost of artillery(and heavier tanks, AA) in early war I could see the higher point total being more reasonable. I think selling a few more kingtigers is exactly what they have in mind.
ReplyDeleteyou're not the first person to say that regarding the points - though personally i have no idea what i'd spend 1900 points on Finn's in EW :)
DeleteHey dudes!
ReplyDeleteIn regards to points levels being high, I agree. When choosing the points values for events, TOs need to understand what they will be fostering. High points will play right into the so-called "Sitzkrieg" armies, and therefore expect to see them.
As others have noted, time limits will be a big consideration as well. You'll need more time per round, but that's going to stretch some people's (such as myself) ability to play without getting exhausted. Who wants to play 3 hours of sit around and get shelled?
I feel I should also point out that those points are for a couple of BF-run events in the USA. They shouldn't have any impact on the UK scene unless the BFUK guys adopt those same points, but that's up to them. It's also not a mandatory points level for other events, so TOs should feel free to (indeed encouraged) to ignore them altogether.
In my personal opinion, smaller points are best. They make for interesting list building choices and limit overwhelming firepower (like in Nam). I also believe that far from what some conspiracy theorists believe, smaller points actually generate more sales because the temptation to try something new is greater. More points means people are more apt to just add-on to existing armies, and the thought to try something entirely new is heavily diminished.
All in good fun,
Mike