3 hours ago, Caimheul1313 said:

In my opinion, the point limit and Force Org chart are more important for organized play and pickup games than casual games between friends, when such rules don't need to be followed if both parties agree.

Yes. I doubt the value of unquestionably following a system (especially at home) that allows Vader to fight Vader, but doesn't allow Vader to take 7 squads of ordinary stormtroopers at once.

When I play with friends I usually stick to 800 points but I would never suggest anyone else not do so. The game size just works for me as-is. If it doesn't work for you change it.

For everyone that’s saying, they’ll just ad soooooo many Activation with those 200 points, it will jus be overwealming (in so many words or less).

Keep in mind, no-one can go over 18 (17 currently - we only have 1 operative) activations.

Though that is a lot of activations, I have seen people play 14 activations with 800 points. Four more activations isn’t sooooo overwealming and non of your troops are going to have much punch cause if you’re adding that many they’re naked troops anyway. But with 1000 points you have more options and more variety.

Just sayin’.

16 minutes ago, JediPartisan said:

For everyone that’s saying, they’ll just ad soooooo many Activation with those 200 points, it will jus be overwealming (in so many words or less).

Keep in mind, no-one can go over 18 (17 currently - we only have 1 operative) activations.

Though that is a lot of activations, I have seen people play 14 activations with 800 points. Four more activations isn’t sooooo overwealming and non of your troops are going to have much punch cause if you’re adding that many they’re naked troops anyway. But with 1000 points you have more options and more variety.

I'd hardly call adding strike teams with upgrades "naked troops."

The main point is, in the competitive meta (the only time you are obligated to stick to the point limit set by FFG anyway), the extra 200 points is more likely to be spent on more activations rather than an a single vehicle/hero.

The new vehicles are another data point in favor of 1000 points. 310 points for two transports in an 800 point army is kind of untenable, but in a 1000 point army they're pretty good.

I continue to maintain that the force org chart is better designed for that points limit as well (six Corps units at 800 points, really?)

11 hours ago, Caimheul1313 said:

I'd hardly call adding strike teams with upgrades "naked troops."

The main point is, in the competitive meta (the only time you are obligated to stick to the point limit set by FFG anyway), the extra 200 points is more likely to be spent on more activations rather than an a single vehicle/hero.

And there are only 3 possible strike teams. As much as 1000 points allows for more variety, the limits on numbers of troops keeps things in perspective. Many, many players are already running 3 strike teams at 800 points. Can’t add more even with 200 extra points. And that’s why we’re saying it’s more than likely that people will add the big ticket item, like a heavy.

6 hours ago, JediPartisan said:

And there are only 3 possible strike teams. As much as 1000 points allows for more variety, the limits on numbers of troops keeps things in perspective. Many, many players are already running 3 strike teams at 800 points. Can’t add more even with 200 extra points. And that’s why we’re saying it’s more than likely that people will add the big ticket item, like a heavy.

You claimed that if one added four activations they would not be very effective since they would have to be "naked troops." That is not the case: three sniper strike teams and one Rebel trooper squad with Z6 equals 194 points, and for the imperials adding a Stormtrooper squad with DLT is 200 exactly. With introduction of cheap generic commanders, people who have been running Leia or Veers purely for a cheap primary/secondary commander will be able to free up 30-40 points, either for upgrading of naked troopers, or adding a strike team.

People in the competitive environment are only likely to add a "big ticket item" if they don't have any other way of adding activations. The 14 activation lists you have seen at 800 points will start becoming the norm. In my experience, force limits are supposed to prevent spamming of any one type of unit, so we don't have someone try to field 800 points of strike teams, or 3+ AT-STs competitively. At 1000 points, it will become the norm for the force org chart to be practically full just to maximize activations, and much of the variation is likely to be actually lost, since you won't have to choose between a lot of corps units OR an AT-ST/Tank.

There is a 1000 point escalation series of games, where the last games (at 1000 points) are allotted an extra half hour of play time over the 800 point games, and have a different Force Org chart, posted below:

Maximum 1000 points

• 1-3 Commander units

• 4-6 Corps units

• 0-3 Special Forces units

• 0-3 Support units

• 0-3 Heavy units

• 0-2 Operative units

This shows that the current force org chart is not designed or intended by FFG to be used with more than 800 points.

Honestly, probably the most healthy thing they could add to the competitive play document is an additional army building restriction of a maximum number of units. I'd argue as low as 10 for 800 point games though perhaps 12 is more reasonable. I think the game could definitely shine at 1000 points and the FOC above with something like a 12-15 unit cap to make the expensive stuff more viable.

I tend to play 400 point games on a 3x3 its super quick and not to much for newer players to get the hang of

On 1/14/2019 at 4:20 PM, Caimheul1313 said:

The main point is, in the competitive meta (the only time you are obligated to stick to the point limit set by FFG anyway), the extra 200 points is more likely to be spent on more activations rather than an a single vehicle/hero.

Assuming we're still firmly in the realm of playing unofficial games cause we're using 1000 points, we can make any other changes we want, too.

I'd play 1,000 points with houserules for army building which pretty much deleted the "competitive meta".

Warhammer figured this out long ago, there's something magical about a 9 to 12 piece army that just works right. As a kid you think, 'I want 30 units,' but you try an over-sized game and you quickly realize it's neat as a concept and a chore in execution. 800 points works great for competitions anyway, you want a relatively tight match-up at tournaments.

800 is fine.

I did once play a 4 player game (2v2) with 1600 pts per side (each person brought a full 800 pt list). It was super fun! We played on a full 4'x6' war game mat and it took about 3 hours.

For command cards each player had a full hand of 7 and revealed at the same time, the team with the lower combined pips got priority and got to activate first.

It was fun seeing all of the commanders on the board together (Luke, Leia and Han on one side and Vader and Veers on the other)

Theoretically I would think that Empire would have the advantage at 1k points if you kept the normal force organization chart. It would be pretty easy to fill up your troops and then pick some fun stuff without missing out. That being said Rebels have more cheaper options so I could see them filling out not only the corp choice but also the Elite slot without much of an issue.

I can’t help but think of how often people in old-school X-wing complained that 100 points wasn’t enough, and you really needed just a little more for real freedom with your lists, and everyone would be surprised at how much better their games would get at just 110 or 125 or whatever.

Apparently some players, regardless of the game, don’t like the fact that a meaningful point limit is designed to restrict your list-building choices, and are always looking for a way out or around.

EDIT: I should say, of course do what you want with your army at your house or at your FLGS, with your friends. If the right number for you is 836, go for it.

But there’s absolutely no reason the general standard should change because some players find it restrictive.