Changing Fleet Size May be a Mistake

[Callipygian Elspeth]

I know a lot of people keep saying that fleets should be even bigger than the 1'200 point max currently imposed on 1v1s, I disagree. Already the 1'200 limit puts significant strain on micromanagement in the game, making playing eldar factions nigh-impossible, and thus really only making heavy duty frontline factions, like the Imperial Navy, Necrons, Adeptus Mechanicus and T'au feasable.

HOWEVER, I do think that changes ought to be made in some capacity. A 4v4 mode with 600 points per player, for instance, if feasable in terms of server infastructure could potentially be absolutely incredible. It would give the game both the grand scope and the teamwork / battlegroup feel the game could very much so use without sacrificing micro-intensiveness and skill-based gameplay.

[Asphyxion]

There's still no reason for it to be that low in the Campaign though.

[GrampyGrey]

Me and a friend just wants to ♥♥♥♥ around against the ai in skirmish 2v2. But how can we even make a proper fleet from just 600 points each? We want MORE ships and until that happens I regret buying this game.

[Captain Chris]

I think its good where its at, for single player at least.
Thinking back to Empire: Total War, 20 line ships to manage was a total ballache.
If it were turn based then thats awesome but real time there is a limit for a lot of people. Maybe have a skirmish mode with more ships but its got to be optional or it will put off more people than it satisfies.

[Cynical Cheese Cake]

I want to mess around with a large fleet, is it that much to ask for?

[The Ironguard]

well, you can still field a gigaton of escorts at higher point values. Also, considering the amount of time it takes to destroy anything, you're going to have to micromanage all those ships for a prolonged period of time

[Ahriman]

Honestly, all they really would have to do is increase the points in the 2v2. 600pts is very little and it would be pretty cool if you could have two 1,200 fleets duking it out against 2 1,200 fleets. Going bigger than that might be a tad too much, but at the same time though I do hope that they will give players bigger fights in the campaign.

[BigEl_nobody]

I actually enjoy the 600 points in 2v2. You have less ships, less micromanagement and thus you play better AND you have to depend more on teamwork.
Ranked Play should definitely be set points, and I think the 1200/600 is a very sweet spot between having a lot of ships and still be able to use them effectively. More than 1200 and you would just A-Move your ships in/set them to autoengage I feel.

However, at the same time, I would love to see a slider to adjust fleet points to be more than 1200/600 for Skirmish, because people (myself included) love to just mess around, having big battles just to see the spectacle. Its not serious playing, its just mindless fun (which is great).

Also, having more in the campaign I would also agree with.

[Callipygian Elspeth]

Originally posted by BigEl_nobody:

I actually enjoy the 600 points in 2v2. You have less ships, less micromanagement and thus you play better AND you have to depend more on teamwork.
Ranked Play should definitely be set points, and I think the 1200/600 is a very sweet spot between having a lot of ships and still be able to use them effectively. More than 1200 and you would just A-Move your ships in/set them to autoengage I feel.

However, at the same time, I would love to see a slider to adjust fleet points to be more than 1200/600 for Skirmish, because people (myself included) love to just mess around, having big battles just to see the spectacle. Its not serious playing, its just mindless fun (which is great).

Also, having more in the campaign I would also agree with.

I completely agree with you, which is why I'd say a 4v4 with 600 points each might be really darn good fun, if possible. Though of course the cap in skirmish & campaign should be manually set, its pretty lacking as it stands

[BigEl_nobody]

Originally posted by Khorne Flakes:

Originally posted by BigEl_nobody:

I actually enjoy the 600 points in 2v2. You have less ships, less micromanagement and thus you play better AND you have to depend more on teamwork.
Ranked Play should definitely be set points, and I think the 1200/600 is a very sweet spot between having a lot of ships and still be able to use them effectively. More than 1200 and you would just A-Move your ships in/set them to autoengage I feel.

However, at the same time, I would love to see a slider to adjust fleet points to be more than 1200/600 for Skirmish, because people (myself included) love to just mess around, having big battles just to see the spectacle. Its not serious playing, its just mindless fun (which is great).

Also, having more in the campaign I would also agree with.

I completely agree with you, which is why I'd say a 4v4 with 600 points each might be really darn good fun, if possible. Though of course the cap in skirmish & campaign should be manually set, its pretty lacking as it stands

I am not a fan of 4v4 formats in strategy games personally. I much prefer 3v3, and in case of BFG2, having 4600 points worth of ships on the same maps as you play 1v1 on would probably be problematic and also ties into the reason why more than 1200 would be bad for serious play.

Example: Lets say you play Tyranids and want to use the size of the map to flank with most of your forces from an unexpected angle. Probably cant do that with 4 players on each side since their combined forces will most likely fill the length of the map. And when you make the maps bigger in response (which would mean more work for the devs), slower factions will be at a bigger disadvantage because it will take them even longer to get to a certain point to capture or help or flank.

Another factor is that the more players and the bigger the fleets, the cheesier the tactics will become. Thats just a natural consequence, look at other strategy games like Starcraft 2 where that became a real problem for 2v2, but even more for 3v3 and 4v4.

And last but not least, the more fleet points you have, the less viable cheaper ships/lower ship classes get. I mean, I love the big ships too, the bigger the better. But when I can field a dozen battleships, 1. Each of them is not special anymore and 2. Smaller ships become mostly obsolete.
To a certain degree, less is more. The gameplay is built around utilizing Light Cruisers and normal Cruisers too, let alone escort ships.

[Kurnous]

Originally posted by BigEl_nobody:

I actually enjoy the 600 points in 2v2. You have less ships, less micromanagement and thus you play better AND you have to depend more on teamwork.
Ranked Play should definitely be set points, and I think the 1200/600 is a very sweet spot between having a lot of ships and still be able to use them effectively. More than 1200 and you would just A-Move your ships in/set them to autoengage I feel.

However, at the same time, I would love to see a slider to adjust fleet points to be more than 1200/600 for Skirmish, because people (myself included) love to just mess around, having big battles just to see the spectacle. Its not serious playing, its just mindless fun (which is great).

Also, having more in the campaign I would also agree with.

Great post. Completely agree. Also the slider for skirmish is a great idea as well.

[Apollo Densin]

Going to agree with the ability to add in more points if you want. Lets see a 5k point game

[NerdExtrodinare]

I'd support adding a "you want a custom game with 5k points? Go ahead you crazy people!" But I agree that in a non arranged game the limits are good for the factions like eldar that require more management.