Hello fellow friends of little fighting men.  

I came back to Epic after a long pause (you guess it, stopped playing after E40k had come out). The decision to give it another try was made shortly after my old gaming mates and I found out about Netepic two months ago. Since then, we have conducted a few minor battles between SM, Orcs and Pointy Hats of 2000 points to get back into it.
However, I was wondering what you consider the perfect points value for a match, should there be any. Of course, I merrily remember massive clashes between 20k points armies, with everything we had on the table, back in the days   ...

But what do you think is the best points value for a good and strategically challenging game in Netepic?

So please allow me to introduce myself to the forums with a small poll.

Thanks in advance for your answers

Jan

P.S.: By the way. All three of us live in Berlin. So should any of you live in the vicinity, let me know. Always happy to do a small match :-)

Edit: Seems the poll entries are not in the order I have written them. Excuse the small mess-up.

Welcome aboard, Sanjuro. It's always good to see a veteran returning to the fold. I presume you live on Berlin, Germany, not Berlin, Connecticut.    

For SM2/NetEpic I almost always play 5000 point games. It's enough points to fight a decent sized battle, but doesn't take all day to play.

_________________
"I don't believe in destiny or the guiding hand of fate." N. Peart

Thanks, Dwarf Supreme!

Yes, Berlin, Germany.    I wonder whether there are epic players in Berlin, CT as well? Anyone?  

sanjuro

Welcome to TacCom Sanjuro,

Always good to hear from another NetEpic fan.

If your looking to play your games in about three to four hours then 5,000 to 6,000 points is about right. If you want to be quicker then anything from 3,000 to 4,000 points could take from 1 to 2 hours. Depending how bad or well you play.
However if you are fortunate to have your own games room with table and are able to leave everything laid out waiting for play to continue then the skies the limit.
I merrily remember massive clashes between 20k points armies,

_________________
My head is full of War...

[img]http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk120/Warhead40k/Tyranid%20Swarm/DSC02262.jpg[/img]

hey there, I am one of sanjuros buddies

Damn, Warhead: "f your looking to play your games in about three to four hours then 5,000 to 6,000 points is about right."  

It took us nine hours the other night to go through three rounds of 2000 pts. *cough* Anyway, good to hear that it's actually possible for veterans to boil that down to a minimum. We've just set ourselves a new goal i'd say.

It took us nine hours the other night to go through three rounds of 2000 pts. *cough*

_________________
My head is full of War...

[img]http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk120/Warhead40k/Tyranid%20Swarm/DSC02262.jpg[/img]

I play most games at night, so 4K is about the best, though we sometimes plump up to 5K  

_________________
Fire bad, tree pretty - Buffy

no players near me but i like to play masive huge battles 20.000 or more points with 2 or 3 suporting players to help move the hugh armies around. but again no players no fun

_________________
you must be willing to pay the price for fighting in cities to do battle there
sun tsu the art of war

Indeed! And maybe the 2 or 3 "supporting players" could be nice girls in bikinis.  

 

@ Warhead: Yes, beer should play a key role in any battle  

nice girls in bikinis.  

_________________
My head is full of War...

[img]http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk120/Warhead40k/Tyranid%20Swarm/DSC02262.jpg[/img]

Interesting results, I got the impression from battlereports in Incoming that everyone was playing huge games, something I would aviod if I could.

As I recall the problem when we were playing back in the days, was that we always ended up throwing everything on the table, cause everyone wanted to play! And that in turn led to us abandoning the game at 3 in the morning after having finished the first turn...

So my point is that I think generally a nice smaller game is more fun, for a number of reasons.

1. Greater chance of playing with only painted minis.
2. Time
3. Easier to overview, and thus takes less effort to actually think about your tactics
4. Board doesnt get crowded. With the whole board crammed with units, no room for manouver, and so no room for outflanking your opponent, and risk of stalemate or a boring static shoot-out.

At least thats my opinion, and it should be noted I havent played for about 10 years - so I shouldnt really be in the discussion.  

_________________
"We are the sword of fire with which the Traitors shall be cut down."

I should probably add that I almost always play on an 8' x 4' table. A 5000 point game usually isn't crowded.

_________________
"I don't believe in destiny or the guiding hand of fate." N. Peart

Good points, Parzval.

We did exactly the same back in the days. Although it's fun having the table overflowing with minis this certainly decreases the tactical aspect, as hou have pointed out.

Adding to this, with smaller battles, say 2000 points, you have to choose your army more carefully. On the downside, it is less likely one will encounter a lot of exotic units, I would presume.  

2000 is a bit risky as some armies are very powerful at such small totals (Orks) while others somewhat disadvantaged due to mandatory units (Tyranids).  3K is a good "quick game" size and 4000 is just about perfect...enough units to make it a good fight, but small enough that every unit is important and selection is tricky.  We go to 5-6 for a big fight.  More than that is a novelty event  

_________________
Fire bad, tree pretty - Buffy

Interesting, Zap.

I did not see it from that point until now. But it makes sense. Armies with rather cheap company cards are at an advantage at 2000 pts for being able to buy more special cards. Furthermore, my impression is that small battles favour bikes. This results in a very dynamic if a bit drab game.