Please give these a read and play test them if you like! These will be the missions for the BAO 2014 40K competitive event!
If you catch any misspellings, typos, or have any feedback on the objectives, etc. please feel free to let us know!
Also, GET YOUR TICKETS! This event is already dang near 2/3 sold out and tickets have only been for sale for a little over a week! Don’t miss out.
What about mission #7 I’m going to be needing that one 😉
You’ll find out when you get there =P
I like them overall, simple implementation that encourages (some) movement and (some )risk-taking.
I’m not so impressed with the ‘partial’ modifiers on the deployment zone/no man’s land objectives. If you put your toe in a lake, are you swimming? No. If you want the point, you should have to have your entire unit across the line (same way Linebreaker works, right?). You don’t get a point for ‘destroying one model from an enemy unit’, you get the point for destroying an enemy unit….
I see your point, but saying fully within discourages large unit like Ork Boyz, Gants etc. Which can’t move far enough to cover their own footprint in some cases, and with casualties removed from the front, it can be very punishing. Saying partially within treats all units equally.
And linebreaker only says you have to have one MODEL from one unit completely within the deployment zone. So it only really matters for single model units.
Sure–but since you wrote it so that the objective requires a ‘scoring unit’ (not necessarily an ‘Objective Secured’ unit), it seems reasonable to expect that a horde army would be able to fulfill that objective even under stricter conditions (because it has more than just blob units). Speaking only for myself, I’d rather it be more difficult to fulfill this type of objective.
Fair play. But when your opponent is actively trying to stop you from achieving your ends, it really won’t be easy to do. However! Try them out and see. In our test games so far it’s worked well.
I’m organizing a Quad (4-man Round Robin) in just over a week. We’ll use the missions and see how it goes.
Nice! Let us know if you have any constructive criticism.
Was mission 5 supposed to be primary: Big Guns ? Because right now 4&5 are scouring
Good catch.
I do my best
This is looking really fun. It encourages movement and forces people to make choices. While I like progressive objective scoring as a concept, I think this system will be more fun.
Thanks!
Sorry for being a free-riding foreigner, but do you guys plan on putting up another BAO 40k FAQ? Your last one was awesome! 🙂
Yes we will!
So if you roll (kill a enemy unit) twice does that mean you need to kill two units of would just one give you both?
If I understand it correctly, they are both scored independently of each other.
Kill 1: 1 Point
Kill 2: 2 Points
Eldarain has it
First I want to say excellent job with the missions! They look very refreshing and dynamic. A couple errors I noticed:
Mission 1: Maelstrom objective 6 is missing the phrase “at least partially”, not sure if this was intentional or not.
Mission 3: How does “Objective Secured” interact with the Relic?
Mission 5: Primary Mission is listed as The Scouring. I assume it was supposed to be Big Guns Never Tire. For the Maelstrom objectives, are “Your Objectives” the ones that you placed, or the ones in your deployment zone?
All Missions: Who rolls for Psychic Powers first? It could make a difference, tactically. Is Night Fighting a Mandatory roll? With the new rules, if neither player wants it, you don’t roll. First Blood is listed twice under “Bonus Points”. I assume one of them is supposed to be Slay the Warlord.
My Personal Thoughts: I am not sure how I feel about scoring the Maelstrom missions at the end of each GAME TURN. It feels like there is really no reason to ever go first, even in the Purge the Alien Primary. Five out of six missions are already scoring the larger point value at the end of the last GAME TURN. I would like to see the Maelstrom objectives score at the end of each PLAYER TURN for a bit of balance. I could be wrong here, this is just my first thought on the matter. I plan to do a fair amount of play testing, so my opinion might change.
Thanks for catching some of those typos!
For the Relic, you pick it up per normal, ObSec does nothing special.
Mission 5 is fixed, thanks.
Bonus points fixed, thanks.
Mission one has first blood twice(assuming one is supposed to be warlord) – It looks like this is a copy and paste error on all of them
Maybe instead of partially say “at least one model from X units” just to clear up any potential confusion.
Other than that looks solid, wish I could be there to try them as well as play test them
Good catch on the bonus points, thanks!
If only GW did this with their rules…
Overall I really like them, not too complicated but a nice variety and mix of gameplay.
As someone mention above I feel that the scoring of the Maelstrom objectives at the end of gameturns very heavily rewards going second as they can move onto unoccupied objectives for an easy score where as the player going first is forever going to have his points contested.
Also the player going second has an extra turn of planning how to score their points where as the first player has to move shortly after seeing that turns goals.
This maybe a balancing factor if you feel going first is too powerful but with the primary missions being standard ‘score at end of game’ they already favour going second.
I think it would be more balanced (and similar to the rulebook – if you care about that sort of thing) for each player to roll at the start of their player turn and complete the objectives during that turn. Probably simpler for rules purposes as well.
Thanks for the feedback!
A lot of folks said off the cuff that it looks like going second is the way to go, but in practice it hasn’t been the case. We do it this way as if you score on player turn, the player going first can score points before the player going second has a chance to do anything.
As the player going first sees what the player second is going to be doing, it gives them the chance to counter preemptively. Plus, going first still gives you the alhpa strike, too.
I also do not agree with the maelstrom points being scored at the end of the game turn. Does it really matter if the first player gets to go before the second gets a chance to do anything? Perhaps only on objective 6, just change that objective. The point of maelstrom, and what makes them fun is that it is a back and forth that one can score within his/her own turn. The objectives are achieveble as long as you perform the action required. Sometimes you may have to sacrifice to perform said action. That is what makes them appealing. When they are scored at the end of the game turn, it just turns it into advantage for the second player. Scoring maelstrom objectives at the end of the player turn is what make them different and engaging, these missions just turn it into more of the same.
As for going first and having he alpha strike and advantage on first blood, the second player still has the advantage on the primary objectives and line breaker. Slay the warlord is still on equal ground.
Please consider. If you have tried this, what was your experience?
I am curious why fortifications are placed 6ed style. In 7ed you usually place fortifications when you deploy your army. The only fortifications that are placed before hand are non-player ones (eg terrain not ones taken in your army).
Otherwise its an interesting set of missions. I like them but they definitely feel more influenced by 6ed and the old BAO missions rather then the changes made in 7ed. Not necessarily a bad thing this early on, just wonder if this will remain throughout 7ed.
It is easier to deploy Forts while choosing your deployment zone as it lets you adjust terrain and such before people are deploying their armies. Plus, you want them down before yo place objectives.
Ah interesting. I can see the wisdom in that too. Although its also nice to be able to deploy with your army so you aren’t overly projecting your plan to your opponent early on. I guess though there’s only so many places you put these things in a standard BAO table.
Any chance FA or HS will get objective secured in Scouring and Big guns?
BTW Mission 5 still says the scouring.
Fixed, thanks!
We considered it. But, I think we’ll stick with the book this first go around and then adjust from there.
So do you reroll objectives that are impossiable to get
None of them are impossible to get in the sense of, destroy an enemy flyer if they have no flyer. If you roll one up that is not possible to get such as an objective that is too far away or something, no, you do not reroll it.
what about (kill a enemy unit) when you are going first against a drop army. that is impossiable to get no matter what army you are playing
Then you better hope you have and interceptor weapon that gets lucky as you score at the end of the Game Turn! =P
Happened to me… A quad gun exploded my drop pod in a tournament last year. Totally caught me off guard. What are the chances anyway? The shooter was BS4 btw
I’m running a tournament series over the next couple weeks and will be using these I will gather up as much feed back as I can and let you guys know how it went.
Awesome, thanks!
Why do all the missions say first blood twice?
Typo, will fix.