New official battlefield sizes possible?

[Bayul]

GW announced new battlefield sizes for Warhammer 40K for 500/1000, 2000 and 3000 points battles: https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/06/05/four-sizes-fit-allgw-homepage-post-1/



So I'm sure we can all agree that the sky is falling as usual, but until than should we speculate about the possibilty that AOS will be played on this sizes in the near future and how it could influence the game? Could the next GHB already set those sizes as new standard or will we need to wait for AOS 3.0 for a change?

I'd like to point out that these measurements correspond with the Kill Team and Warcry 22-by-30 inches boards and I speculate that WH40K players could see more terrain sets sold by GW.

[DantePQ]

It's impossible to introduce such change in GHB. AoS 3.0 which should arrive summer 2021 could change it, but then whole points system should be readressed to do that. 

 

[Charleston]

Actually seeing some adjustments to game sizes from gw is neat, althrough it seems to affect 40k only at first, I am quite confident that AoS may see similar changes in the future. To be honest, not many people have enough room to have a 4'x6' table around. Smaller boards allow to play on smaller tables and therefore allows more people to enjoy their hobby without weird balancing issues or to have rescale each single mission.

The impact on AoS Balance is in my eyes quite unforeseeable. AoS is much more tied to positioning as the game is more centered about meele combat than 40k is. Also, the huge 3"  close combat-area may become a huge issue for downscaled AoS Boards as there will be more board controll and limitation to movement caused this way. Althrough I would wish a downscale to 1" meele-range, I know this is unlikely to happen as it would require GW to rework all warscrolls or at least forsake all weapon ranges. So yeah, I am curious how GW may approach this.

[Sharkbelly]

These sizes correspond pretty well with the Blasted Hallowheart and Moon Base Klaisus boards.

[Ajmaus]

My local stores are already going to be adapting to the 60x44 tables sizes for 40k and AOS has no official table size in 2.0 the missions work on any table size that's rectangular.. so I think we might adopt it early but it is very possible for gh2020 to add a suggested table size and missions designed for that table size.

[lare2]

If the minimum size becomes the standard in 40k and if it's successful then I've little doubt AoS will follow suit. 

[Oak7603]

2 hours ago, Charleston said:

...To be honest, not many people have enough room to have a 4'x6' table around. Smaller boards allow to play on smaller tables and therefore allows more people to enjoy their hobby without weird balancing issues or to have rescale each single mission...

But of the three sizes suggested, all 3 are still almost 4' wide, 1 is 5'" and the other is 7'6 so if these sizes were used they would still require a table 4' wide and now nearly 8' long. And these are minimum sizes... 

Imagine units like Stormcast with their 5 inch move having to get across a minimum 90' board in 5 turns!

59 minutes ago, Ajmaus said:

... AOS has no official table size in 2.0 the missions work on any table size that's rectangular...

The Core Rules have it as at least 2" square but the battleplans are all measured as if on a 6'x4', as are the terrain generator options in the GHB so I would guess that this is the size recommended. If the sizes all change then like previous comments have said - warscrolls have so many size and distance requirements then it all gets complicated - 6" ambush, 9" from enemy, 3" combat zone, Spell ranges, distance between objectives and more. I get that these could be adjusted to match but it's gonna get awkward with various sizes.

It would be a lot easier if they wanted to change everything in 3.0 to just set any new sizes as a straight percentage - 2'x3' (50%), 3'x4'6" (75%) and then 4'x6' (100%).

 

[Grimrock]

Honestly I don't think they're trying to change people's table sizes. They only brought this in so the transition from something like kill team is easier, the minimum sizes are all multiples of those boards. People can still use their 6x4 tables but now it's official that they can use their kill team (or warcry) boards pushed together too. I wouldn't be surprised at all if they did the same thing for age of Sigmar.

Also remember that the 90" board is for 3000 points games, not something that's going to come up often.

[Sleboda]

55 minutes ago, Grimrock said:

Honestly I don't think they're trying to change people's table sizes. They only brought this in so the transition from something like kill team is easier, the minimum sizes are all multiples of those boards. People can still use their 6x4 tables but now it's official that they can use their kill team (or warcry) boards pushed together too. 

This guy gets it.

The sizes are minimums, not mandates. It's just to help folks transition from Kill Team if they want. The rest of us can keep playing on our 4x6 or, even older, 4x8 tables.

[PraetorDragoon]

I have played a bunch on the Hallowheart (the 44x60) table and that didn't feel too limiting. No big problems with setups either.

It wouldn't really surprise me if those showed up as minimums in a GHB. We already have seen a bit of the idea of a 44x30 board with the Meeting Engagements and the Close Quarters battles in GBH2019.

[ManlyMuppet88]

Is anyone actully going to pay attention to it outside of tournaments anyway? I seriously  doubt that people are  going to change their boards/tables if they're an inch or two short.  Board size is ultimately going to be dictated by available space and personal preference.

[zedatkinszed]

Honestly I think these sizes actual correspond to modern standard dining table sizes in the UK and US. I don't know about anyone else but I had to scratch build my 6'x4' table (and when I grew up it had to stay in my parents house until I could afford to buy my own). When Warcry came along with its 22" x 30" it kinda felt weird until you add the cards and a dice rolling space for both players then its a whole regular-small kitchen table. Warcry x 2 = 30 x 44 btw which is a normal size table (in Europe our equivalent is 114cm x 76cm) and the size of combat patrol above.

GW are just trying to let people use actual dining tables. They're not invalidating our custom made gaming ones.

What I'd actually like to see change is the semi-official display board sizes going to (or allowing) 22" by 30". Then you could use them for gaming too. 24" by 24" is cool when you have a 8'x4' or 6'x4' space. But if GW are going from mutiples of 2'x2' to multiples of 30" length and 22" width then a display board should be 30"x22".

Edited June 7, 2020 by zedatkinszed

[Landohammer]

This is a hugely dividing issue on other forums. Here are some quick tidbits i have picked up

-Rule "suggestions" in 40k are almost always officially adopted. So the word "minimum" isnt as relevant here as we think. For example the "rule of 3" was also technically a suggestion but was widely implemented. The ITC guys will be implementing the new smaller table sizes which further confirms this. 

-The difference is pretty noticeable. You actually lose 6 square feet of gaming area. 

-AOS plays at a smaller scale than 40k, so table reduction for us is definitely in the realm of possibility if they are already changing 40k.

 Personally i think its ultimately on the shop-owners to decide what they make available to players but my pickup games of 40k will continue to be 6x4 as i always use realm of battle boards or Frontline mats and I am not going to tape them off. 

[zedatkinszed]

55 minutes ago, Landohammer said:

This is a hugely dividing issue on other forums. Here are some quick tidbits i have picked up

-Rule "suggestions" in 40k are almost always officially adopted. So the word "minimum" isnt as relevant here as we think. For example the "rule of 3" was also technically a suggestion but was widely implemented. The ITC guys will be implementing the new smaller table sizes which further confirms this. 

-The difference is pretty noticeable. You actually lose 6 square feet of gaming area. 

-AOS plays at a smaller scale than 40k, so table reduction for us is definitely in the realm of possibility if they are already changing 40k.

 Personally i think its ultimately on the shop-owners to decide what they make available to players but my pickup games of 40k will continue to be 6x4 as i always use realm of battle boards or Frontline mats and I am not going to tape them off. 

As someone who walked away from 40K (and has two different 3K pts armies in mothballs) because of its tendency to attract the most toxic of "that guy" type gamers. Sure I can see how this would drive them nuts. 

There is nothing stopping you having a pickup game at 48"x72". It just means that if somebody only have a standard 44" x 60" kitchen table they can still play a ≤2K game. I fail to see HOW that's a bad thing. Nobody's banning 48"x72". Great if you've got that size of table - so do I. But the majority of ppl I know don't.

And at 3K (aka Apocalypse for this neckbeard) 8'x4' is still perfect. But if all you have is a dining table that can extend to 90" then you can still have a huge epic 3K 40K battle. What's so terrible about that?!  Most people in the world don't have the space for an 6'x4' gaming table or a bespoke gaming room. Most of us have families and need our rooms for the kids or an office. And some of us barely have space for our collections in our garages.

All GW are trying to do here is make games accessible to more people with normal sized tables. (Hell it'll make building a gaming table 100% easier if you can start with a standard frame bought in a shop.) 

They're not banning 6'x4' or 4'x8' (or bigger) games.

Edited June 7, 2020 by zedatkinszed

[AverageBoss]

I play tons of non-gw games, so am long used to chopping area off of 6x4 tables, it's not really a big deal.

Also comes with significant upsides. For one thing, you can use the dead space to store reserves, casualties, and game tools.

[Maddpainting]

23 hours ago, Landohammer said:

This is a hugely dividing issue on other forums. Here are some quick tidbits i have picked up

-Rule "suggestions" in 40k are almost always officially adopted. So the word "minimum" isnt as relevant here as we think. For example the "rule of 3" was also technically a suggestion but was widely implemented. The ITC guys will be implementing the new smaller table sizes which further confirms this. 

-The difference is pretty noticeable. You actually lose 6 square feet of gaming area. 

-AOS plays at a smaller scale than 40k, so table reduction for us is definitely in the realm of possibility if they are already changing 40k.

 Personally i think its ultimately on the shop-owners to decide what they make available to players but my pickup games of 40k will continue to be 6x4 as i always use realm of battle boards or Frontline mats and I am not going to tape them off. 

Thats not really true tho, the community as a whole wanted a rule like Ro3 and was ready for it b.c GW was just chasing the meta nerfing 1 unit at a time that people spammed. Events will go smaller for sure just so they can fit more tables/room, but a lot of locals plays more than just AoS/0k, so they will do what works best for their players.

Also there are many rules that are suggestions that no one plays with. Did you know there are over 20 terrain rules? and points are only suggestions too, many events still play 1750/1850 over 1k and 2k. 

A lot of players are concern the power level just went back up and the game is going to be more deadly than before, so players might force events back to 4x6 Example, no hiding from melee, less space to move, closer to double tap range (Rapid fire) closer to shooting in general, also harder to DS and outflank.

So we will have to wait and see for 40k, as for AoS? Smaller tables means less movement tricks and faster engagements, which i personally don't like, but i don't think it would change to much to what we have now. Some armies will just be a little weaker, and DSing harder. I'm more concerned about DSing tbh.

Edited June 8, 2020 by Maddpainting

[chord]

On 6/6/2020 at 2:40 PM, PraetorDragoon said:

I have played a bunch on the Hallowheart (the 44x60) table and that didn't feel too limiting. No big problems with setups either.

 

Agreed, the Hallowheart box set is what I use, what a great release.

[Landohammer]

16 minutes ago, Maddpainting said:

Thats not really true tho, the community as a whole wanted a rule like Ro3 and was ready for it b.c GW was just chasing the meta nerfing 1 unit at a time that people spammed. Events will go smaller for sure just so they can fit more tables/room, but a lot of locals plays more than just AoS/0k, so they will do what works best for their players.
 

I personally find it a really strange decision. The working theory is that it encourages people to use the cardboard mats like Moon Base Klassius or multiple kill-team mats. And the guy at ITC who made the decision to adopt the minimum table actually sells neoprene mats. So its likely not a balancing mechanic but more-so a profit-driven mechanic which is a bit annoying.

 Many have invested quite a bit in Frontline mats and Realm of Battle Boards. And I don't see FLGS owners and TOs going through the hassle of taping off all of their stuff if they don't have, especially if it is technically optional. 

 I could be wrong here but I do hate anything that fractures the community and this appears to already be doing it  

Also there are many rules that are suggestions that no one plays with. Did you know there are over 20 terrain rules? and points are only suggestions too, many events still play 1750/1850 over 1k and 2k. 

So my store only really has ruins, forests, and craters and I assure you we definitely use all of those special terrain rules. I think many of the fancier terrain pieces simply aren't available or are impractically expensive,  so the rules just never really see play. I play alooooot of tournaments and have only ever seen 1k and 2k outside of weird escalation stuff or intentionally-goofy themed tournaments. (like 1 in 20 tournaments maybe)

A lot of players are concern the power level just went back up and the game is going to be more deadly than before, so players might force events back to 4x6 Example, no hiding from melee, less space to move, closer to double tap range (Rapid fire) closer to shooting in general, also harder to DS and outflank.

So there are going to be less models on the field, and terrain is going to be able to unconditionally block LOS. But armies may no longer be taking troops, so the models on the field are going to be a lot more efficient at what they do. So its hard to say which way it will go. 

Yea your typical rapid fire 24" bolter is going to probably be more effective, but if most of my army is Repulsors then I'm not sure I will care. 
 

 

[michu]

27 minutes ago, Landohammer said:

I personally find it a really strange decision. The working theory is that it encourages people to use the cardboard mats like Moon Base Klassius or multiple kill-team mats. And the guy at ITC who made the decision to adopt the minimum table actually sells neoprene mats. So its likely not a balancing mechanic but more-so a profit-driven mechanic which is a bit annoying.

Someone already said it - many of us don't have 6x4 tables. Now I can actually play a 2000 pts game of 40k at home. And it's fracturing that part of community which does not understand word "minimum". You want to play on 6x4? Go for it. But actual option to use smaller board is a benefit.

Edited June 8, 2020 by michu

[Maddpainting]

FLG, NOVA, and a couple others already announced they are going to smaller tables.

A lot are actually really cheap and easy to make at home. like Pipes, just buy 1 8ft PVC pipe, a pipe cutter, and some glue/lipties, you have enough pipe for 4-6 tables now. Same for Tank traps, old sprues and you can make those. You can also base them for cheap. Barricades are just as easy too. You can set up 5 tables full of different terrain for about $50. Thats $10 a table to have Pipes, rubble, tank tracks, barricades, etc...

There isn't less models on the field, on Warhammer TV friday (so you can go watch if you wanted) he literally said "The internet grossly over estimated the points changes. ....  My 2k Marine army is only one squad less".

And yes armies will still take at least 3 troops as more detachments cost CP and if you take a detachment with troops and your WL is in it, then your Detachment wont cost CP. You also need units to activate some secondaries. 

Marines also come standard with a 30" rapid fire gun. Also Tau straight has mostly 30". Having less backfield means turn 1 is deadlier just b.c less back space. And with less table space there is less terrain space. GW also said you can assign "some" terrain as LoS blocking. Terrain is the biggest mystery for sure right now. But over all its less space on the table with some game army sizes. Then you have IG tanks, Knights, SM tanks, etc.. all that can shoot 48". Without cover there is officially no hiding, even on long edges now.

Finally DSing and Outflanking got a lot harder to use. With a 9" no touch zone, -6" and -12" space that 9" just got a lot bigger. For my Harlequins an elite army, i can also zone out players and i do in events all the time. When you have 6-7 characters (you can't shoot characters in 40k without a rule that says you can) and they have invuls so those snipers can't kill me. I can effectively have just 3 of my characters (DJ's) block out a 38x38x38 inch triangle (a odd looking circular triangle). If the table is -12" that makes it much eeasier for me to do so. Then you have Nids/Orks/Tau/Guard that can do it even better than Quins. 

 

Quote

Someone already said it - many of us don't have 6x4 tables. Now I can actually play a 2000 pts game of 40k at home. And it's fracturing that part of community which does not understand word "minimum". You want to play on 6x4? Go for it. But actual option to use smaller board is a benefit.

This is true, but a lot already announce they are going smaller. My local will stay 4x6 b.c we spent a lot of money on custom tables/mats and we still play AoS long with other games. We might in the future go to smaller boards for 40k, but not for now. We for sure will test the game out as both sizes anyways.

Edited June 8, 2020 by Maddpainting

[michu]

15 minutes ago, Maddpainting said:

This is true, but a lot already announce they are going smaller. My local will stay 4x6 b.c we spent a lot of money on custom tables/mats and we still play AoS long with other games. We might in the future go to smaller boards for 40k, but not for now. We for sure will test the game out as both sizes anyways.

But that's exactly my point - you can still play on 6x4 if you want. But now we have official statement that if we play on smaller board it's still going to work as it was balanced (sort of) with smaller board in mind.

[Landohammer]

9 minutes ago, michu said:

Someone already said it - many of us don't have 6x4 tables. Now I can actually play a 2000 pts game of 40k at home. And it's fracturing that part of community which does not understand word "minimum". You want to play on 6x4? Go for it. But actual option to use smaller board is a benefit.

The problem is that if every major competitive outlet uses the smaller table sizes, then that is what everyone will want to play in pickup games. Most guys I know who play 40k generally see their pickup/casual games as practice for an eventual tournament. 

 

7 minutes ago, Maddpainting said:

FLG, NOVA, and a couple others already announced they are going to smaller tables.

Yikes. Oh well. Looks like its a done deal now.

There isn't less models on the field, on Warhammer TV friday (so you can go watch if you wanted) he literally said "The internet grossly over estimated the points changes. ....  My 2k Marine army is only one squad less".

So I did hear about this statement, but its pretty anecdotal and doesn't really provide context. The actual numerical examples provided in the release had a MINIMUM markup of 18% and the second example provided was a 50% markup. 

So even if we err on the conservative side, that is a 360pt drop in game size. So apparently the single unit he dropped was a Repulsor Executioner lol

And yes armies will still take at least 3 troops as more detachments cost CP and if you take a detachment with troops and your WL is in it, then your Detachment wont cost CP. You also need units to activate some secondaries. 

If i am having to field a 1650pt army, then I assure you I would gladly sacrifice 2-3 CP of my 17+CP to avoid paying 200pts+ in troop tax. 
 

This is true, but a lot already announce they are going smaller. My local will stay 4x6 b.c we spent a lot of money on custom tables/mats and we still play AoS long with other games. We might in the future go to smaller boards for 40k, but not for now. We for sure will test the game out as both sizes anyways.

Same. I am really curious to see what table sizes the GHB 20 references. If AOS stays 6x4 then I will be happily ripping off that tape every time I play AOS lol

 

[Maddpainting]

Yeah it is possible players will just go smaller games too. I would actually like that better for 40k.  You could be right, spending CP to remove all troops might b best for some armies. Will need to see if there is a Troop tax anywhere else (I doubt it tho).

[michu]

51 minutes ago, Landohammer said:

The problem is that if every major competitive outlet uses the smaller table sizes, then that is what everyone will want to play in pickup games. Most guys I know who play 40k generally see their pickup/casual games as practice for an eventual tournament. 

That's the problem with people's inflexibility not the game. Not everything must be a practice.

[Bayul]

4 hours ago, chord said:

Agreed, the Hallowheart box set is what I use, what a great release.

I am pretty sure that the Blasted Hallowheart set is not 44" x 60".