another 1500 fan here. though 1000 can also be good.

Once I had my host friend started the game with 1.5k on a 4 v 4. Needless to say, everyone was bitching at first, but once we held high points and control them, bigger things start to roll in to support the infantry.

In another, we basically assigned roles to each player, infantry, tanks, support and air.

I find low point games no better, it makes spamming cheap units more effective and it often turns into rock paper scissors matches because you can't field a flexible army.

Low point games are great for PACT players - spam cheap inf and tanks for map control - boom economy - spam rockets and ATGM tanks - gg.

No different to end result of high point games really - it just drags things out for longer.

Mostly play 1500 point 1v1 or 2v2 games with friends. It even works well when there is 3 of us and we play 2v1 with 2 players having 750.

I feel the game is at it's best at this level where you really have to think if you can afford that shiny Havoc. Recon becomes very important and the tension is fantastic - very cat and mouse. You don't know what the other guy has bought, so you have to go and find out. Ambushes are set for recon helos and AAA, arty starts probing, hidden recon gets found and tries to do a runner... it's great.

I've played a couple of 2000 point games, not much difference to the above, but anything above that is one of the OP 'fests'. Just buy pretty much anything you want, charge in and see if your blob beats his. Rinse, repeat. *yawn

I feel that low point games (<1000 per player) are great IF you're playing with friends on your team and you can coordinate what you want to do in the game properly.

In public games, it is very hit and miss dependent on whether your team can agree on what strategy to play out before the game starts... Like having 3 FOBs in a 3v3 1500 point is just asking for it. At least on higher point games, you can usually get enough points to round out your force "well enough" to do something decent.

Anything more than 2000 per player, and it feels like extreme arty fest and spam all over the place especially for the smaller maps, but still manageable on the larger maps.

Agree that 1500 per player is nice in most instances. Had some nice games with higher settings though. Point is, that amount of starting points acts as a multiplier for retardism (insane spamming, absurd army compositions etc). Creative and sound players can have fun with 2000+ point each, but these games are more sensitive to presence of idiots.

Regarding balance complaints and raging over game play: game seems to be well balanced on default setting. Custom setting (high points, 4v4 on tiny maps etc) produce some strange situations, not necessarily due to omfg-imba-OP units.

750-1000pt battles-> best battles. totaly agree.

You are absolutely right. But everytime I try to host a, f.i., 1500pts 3v3 nobody joins for 10mins. Then I usually give up.

_________________
Newest Video on my channel: Wargame: AirLand Battle | Playing the Danes with Firestarter
Basic Tutorial for Newbies: Wargame: AirLand Battle | The Very Basics

Yeah I'm really not going for the large games any more. They are just spamfests that eventually end in suicide scouting for artillery. Interestingly low point games are actually much more skillful and fun to play.

Although I've seen a lot of spamming there as well, the spams usually fare pretty badly in low point games.

_________________
Read my PC game blog