So here we are! Barring any grammar or clarity issues, or any egregious balance issues, the missions are now done.
Read the missions, here.
Changes have been written in magenta for convenience.
Thanks to everyone for contributing to these new ITC 40k 2020 season missions! This represents a community effort and reflects the desires of the ITC community of 40k enthusiasts. The continued evolution of these missions will hopefully give us a more balanced and enjoyable matched play experience. And of course, as we always say, you can use any missions you like in the ITC so if your community wants to mix it up, or really loves the Chapter Approved 2019 mission set, or whatever the case may be, feel free to do so and still count points to the ITC.
Enjoy and leave any comments or critiques in the comments section below!
And remember, Frontline Gaming sells gaming products at a discount, every day in their webcart!
For king of the hill and imperial knights. 1 Knight scores the single point, but they cannot get the double point on turn 2 plus? Or should it read two Knights on the center scores two points? I think it should.
It reads: a combination of two units, a Knight being one of them. So, you need two knights, or a knight and a multi-model units, etc.
woooo! changes in magenta 😀
Are war dogs considered Chaos knights for the Postman?
The exception only applies to titanic.
It doesn’t say that in the document, it simply says “Imperial Knights and Chaos Knights,” and War Dogs/Armigers certainly are part of those factions.
The Marked for death change is gonna lead to a significant point increase in Night Spinners (calling it). On the other hand, it gives me a reason to take Starcannons on wraithlords and falcons, though I can see crafters lists that consist of mostly t7/8 models and able to make marked for death and BB very difficult possibly being “too good” with the marine nerf.
BGH will deal with the vehicles just below 120 points
This might be a typo, but it appears that the engineers secondary says in one section you need to have 2 units hold the same objectives to score a secondary point. But later it says if you hold 2 separate objectives, you can score 2pts. But there are only 2 engineer units total.
“Starting from Battle Round 2, if one or more of these units starts and ends your turn within 3” of the **same objective marker** you control…” and then later is says, “If you have two Engineer units performing this role on **two separate objectives** and one or more of the objectives is outside of your deployment zone, earn 2pts.”
It seems like it takes 2 units to hold 1 objective, but later you can hold 2 objectives with 2 units for 2 points.
I might be reading that wrong, but I just thought I would bring it up.
It’s start and end your turn within 3″ of the same objective, I think it’s to stop units with teleport abilities, high movement etc starting the turn on one objective and move to another and still getting engineers
Exactly.
Regarding Recon and Sappers secondary where it specifies objectives outside a deployment zone, do you mean just the actual objective marker must be out, or the marker and its 3″ aura/bubble? Cause it would be possible for a marker to be outside of the deployment zone, yet still able to grab it from within during deployment.
Just the maker itself.
There was a time where not long ago when the community actually got to vote on itc changes
Now those decisions are made behind closed doors
Do TOs talk to every single participant at their events to able to speak for all players
It’s too big now to do it the old way.
The idea is that the TOs are your representatives. It’s vastly easier to get things done with a smaller group of just over 400 than a behemoth of 14,000+ people for 40k alone.
Speak to your regional rep to express your ideas and concerns, or to your local TO. If they aren’t in the group currently, encourage them to join.
Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.
You can’t expect to wield supreme executive power just ’cause some watery tart threw a sword at you!
Help help I’m being repressed!
*sorry couldn’t resist
lol, well played, sir!
Look! There is some good mud over here.
The way it reads at the moment, you can stack big game hunter with other seek and destroy secondaries, provided you cause the killing blow with a different unit (or the same unit on a different turn).
Is this intentional? Or does the phrase “by the same unit on the same target” need a little tweak?
Eg. Unit one causes 20 wounds to a knight that is also a character and counts these for big game hunter, then unit 2 causes 4 wounds and kills it and counts the kill for headhunter.
Thanks
You cannot stack them in that way, no.
Does this mean measurement of scoring objectives is no longer to the edge of the marker? I know this is/was the norm and it was written down, but it is not stated anywhere nor the size of a marker?
Honestly, I just want to buy 6″ neoprene markers and use them for all rulesets. 😉
For “The Reaper” don’t forget cavalry unit (chaos deamons or thousand sons have some of them).