Let's play less points than 4500/5000 points!

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

  • Let's play less points than 4500/5000 points!

    Hello guys!

    First of all sorry for my english mistakes as I am not an english native speaker.

    Lets begin...

    I am fan-tournament-boy. I used the ninth age for playing 5000 points each time I can. But I got tired of such quantity of points... I am not saying we should change the system, I am asking for make a system in parallel for all those people they love playing wargames but hate 3-4 hours gaming and units of 50+ models.

    I would like to open this post in order to discuss what would be the best level of points in order to get "competitive-funny-tournable" lists. I propose to start the discussion with 3000 points and I would like to know your opinion. Even would be awesome to have our own post in order to discuss this issue and have a little space in the rulebook (for the next edition). Lets say, maintining the 45000 points ETC tournament, and other paragraph with 2000/3000/... for tournament with less points.

    Last week I played my first 2000 points with Scoub, and I must admit that I had so much fun than playing with 5000 points. So I would like to have a group for tournament and gaming of 3000 points. I give here the post with a small battle report of that game.
    Painting League 2017 - Scoub

    The advantages that I observed playing less than 5000 points are:

    - Faster games: 1 hour... So in one afternoon you are able to play at least 3 games.
    - Less space: you do not need to play in a huge table. As you can play more games then you can change the battlefield more often...
    - Less miniatures: finally I can see units of 20-30 guys maximum!
    - Magic is more effective: one wizard of level 1-2 and the lack of magic dices is balanced.
    - Armies do not abuse and spam the best units. One character, one wizard, one two unit block, one monster, one warmachine and that is it!.
    - Finally you can ask for playing only with painted models! oh yeah!.
    - Cheaper to buy/start an army.
    - One day tournaments can have 5 rounds!!! instead of 3.


    cheers
  • Pellegrim wrote:

    Couldn't agree more :)

    Started this to push in the same dorection Play easier games, play more often: Interest in 2.000 games

    Think 3.000 is still alot, would like to plead for 2.500 or 2.000.
    I mean with 3000 you can more or less satisfy all players!.

    But probably 2700 or 2800 should be enough... this is what I want to discuss in this post.

    And try to find a number of points in order to unify the community.

    So we can organice two type of tournaments: 5000 points and 2500?? SO everybody is satisfied
  • +1

    I have actually thought about this quite a lot as well andprobably come from far the other end of the scale. I'm quite new to T9A and have a total of 24 mounted dudes as of now. That's something like 800 pts. What I really would like is to take this dudes over to my friend, have a quick game and be back in 1.5 hours. Just to watch the figures come to life and start moving them around on the table.

    And I could see us going further than just optimizing for points, I would optimize also for playing speed. Is there for example a way to reduce the T9A ruleset to something that would make it playable in less time? Thinking out loud without any proper knowledge, I'm thinking removing re-rolls, ward saves, commands, auras, presence and not being so strict on movement..

    For me, this would not be intended to be played at a competitive level. If you ever do tournaments you have to play by the T9A 5k rules. This would just be an introductory ruleset and a "casual gamer" ruleset. A ruleset to open the magic of moving regiments around and fighting battles with dice.

    Of course, simplifying the rules like this is going to make it very hard to get the balance right. The game is optimized for balance at 5k and stripping rules to allow very small armies will skew the balance. But here's the caveat: It does not matter. The way I image these kind of games being played group dynamics would actually solve the balance problem. Here's an example: let's say that warmachines where incredible monsters of destruction under these rules. After two games being blown of the table I would tell my friend: "Hey dude, I'm not coming over if you field that steam tank".

    I found this video in my search so we will probably try those rules sometime soon in a 800pts/player 2v2 match.
    Rule changes:
    • No lords
    • Minimum 1 core unit
    • Up to 1 special unit per core unit
    • Up to 1 rare unit per core unit
    • Minimum unit size reduced to 1/2
    • Maximum unit size reduced to 1/2
    This might all be a bit too much, maybe it's better to start just by making a 3k ruleset, that could be also be used for tournaments? I do however think that a standard set of rules for playing matches in the 1k-2k range will be a great tool for recruitment into T9A as it lowers the barrier of entry, which I think that will be very important long term for the project to succeed and continue to recruit new talent.
  • The thing is that reducing the points theoretically should reduce the huge differences between armies.

    For example in the battle report, In my army the general was a plague prophet with destiny armour and he was quite tough... At 5000 points I would never play him like this.

    With the current percentages I would like to "Know" what is the best number of points for small games and fix it.
  • I went a different way.

    IMO, the problem of sometimes boring-long battles is less the number of models but the number of units and the mass of little time-consuming things that all the single models and especially characters cause.


    So I created a homebrew ruleset which is called...
    9th Age Epic Battles Modus

    In fact it's no ruleset as except for three proposals for changing rules (=no challenges, no champions, all units have the "ordering the charge" rule that currently only champions grant), you can directly play with it.

    It's more a different approach for creating army lists.

    In short it's:
    1. less max points for character category
    2. less unkillable characters (concerning AS, ward save, reroll etc.)
    3. more min points for core category
    4. bigger min unit sizes
    5. less single models in total ("support" = monsters, chariots, war machines and other single model units)

    These restrictions reduce the possibility to create MSU, deathstars, avoidance, gunlines with warmachines, monster mash, character mash and chaff and more focusses on MMU with some support.


    As this is how I think a real EPIC mass battle should be (instead of spending most of the points for single models), I will start creating army lists and playing only with this additional restriction.

    Maybe you would like to test this and give a feedback.

    Rules Support

    SE Community Support

    Local Moderator


  • I play 90% Warband at 2500pts. It's a good size as it's too few points to move to "extreme" lists like avoidance, Gunline, Mosnter Mash. Also, to be competitive you need to make hard decisions about General/BSB/Magic as generally you can only take two before gimping your list against someone who has made that trade-off for an extra unit.
    Also, it is obvious earlier in the game as to who has won.

    3000pts is just enough to start to get into enough points where "extreme" lists become more viable. Which imo defeats the point of the fast and enjoyable game format a bit.

    :)
    "The combination of lemon and habenero peppers was confusing to me. I will pay for this tomorrow i think." - Rosanjin Scholar, Iron Chef
  • Yes!

    In the old days of 8th, there was a tournament in the UK called 'A gathering of might' that ran 6 * 1500 point games over the weekend. It was great for getting newer players into the tournament scene. It was fantastic for starting a new army, and was excellent for the hobby as it is much easier to hobby a smaller army to a higher standard.

    Smaller games can be great fun. Hard to list build due to toys limitation too.
  • DJWoodelf wrote:

    So I created a homebrew ruleset which is called...

    9th Age Epic Battles Modus

    In fact it's no ruleset as except for three proposals for changing rules (=no challenges, no champions, all units have the "ordering the charge" rule that currently only champions grant), you can directly play with it.

    (...)


    These restrictions reduce the possibility to create MSU, deathstars, avoidance, gunlines with warmachines, monster mash, character mash and chaff and more focusses on MMU with some support.


    As this is how I think a real EPIC mass battle should be (instead of spending most of the points for single models), I will start creating army lists and playing only with this additional restriction.

    Maybe you would like to test this and give a feedback.
    I'm interested. Did these rule changes also increase the speed of the game, or just made sure lists were more in line with 'realistic' battle lines?
  • mrmossevig wrote:

    DJWoodelf wrote:

    So I created a homebrew ruleset which is called...

    9th Age Epic Battles Modus

    In fact it's no ruleset as except for three proposals for changing rules (=no challenges, no champions, all units have the "ordering the charge" rule that currently only champions grant), you can directly play with it.

    (...)


    These restrictions reduce the possibility to create MSU, deathstars, avoidance, gunlines with warmachines, monster mash, character mash and chaff and more focusses on MMU with some support.


    As this is how I think a real EPIC mass battle should be (instead of spending most of the points for single models), I will start creating army lists and playing only with this additional restriction.

    Maybe you would like to test this and give a feedback.
    I'm interested. Did these rule changes also increase the speed of the game, or just made sure lists were more in line with 'realistic' battle lines?
    Hopefully both which is why I posted this info here. ;)

    As written I will START to play this way. First game probably on Wednesday.
    Will be hard to measure as every game is different.

    Rules Support

    SE Community Support

    Local Moderator


  • I'm the total opposite, I love the big games, and would ideally like the game to go to 7000pts+, but with the number of monsters/shooting similar, so theres a much greater emphasis on infantry blocks. Armies feeling like real armies with battlelines, on larger, deeper battlefields. I'm a huge fan of the perry brothers style huge historical battles, Id love a fantasy game to take on those proportions. Smaller games are fun for scenarios or campaign, but I wouldn't want average games to be any smaller than it is now.
  • I've seen a few batreps at the 6k+ points size and they looked awesome I've got to say. I just don't have time myself. :(

    Also, do you find the grind comes into play more? I.e. Whoever wins the block war tends to win the game?

    Main reason for asking is that in the Warband games I find that whoever wins the flank war wins the game so movement is far more useful than say magic or a grind heavy army. Could just be my meta though.
    "The combination of lemon and habenero peppers was confusing to me. I will pay for this tomorrow i think." - Rosanjin Scholar, Iron Chef
  • Ielthan wrote:

    I'm the total opposite, I love the big games, and would ideally like the game to go to 7000pts+, but with the number of monsters/shooting similar, so theres a much greater emphasis on infantry blocks. Armies feeling like real armies with battlelines, on larger, deeper battlefields. I'm a huge fan of the perry brothers style huge historical battles, Id love a fantasy game to take on those proportions. Smaller games are fun for scenarios or campaign, but I wouldn't want average games to be any smaller than it is now.
    As I tried to explain in my first post I would like to open two possibilities in the rulebook of 9th Age.

    On one side: 4500 Points - Minimum for ETC tournaments

    On the other side: 2500? Points - Warbands.

    So everbody is happy...