Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I am a newbie to V5 so pardon my ignorance...

When I have been at the LGS lately watching games of 40K I have seen many discussions, some heated, that result from one person killing all of the opponents troop choices.

Basically the argument stems from one guy declaring he is the winner because he has killed all of the opponents "troops" so there is no way for the opponent to take any objectives and therefore the game should end. Usually the opponent that has no troops left is saying they want to keep going to see how many more guys he can kill with his non "troop" units and somehow "win".

So, am I just lucky and seeing a specific scenerio that depends on "troops" and this is a non issue on other scenerios?

What do you do when playing and you have either killed all of your opponents troops or have lost all of yours?

If you were playing a mission that involved capturing objectives and you had no troops left but had managed to wipe out your opponent you would, I think, win.

With no troops remaining you can still contest the objectives with your non-troops units and deny them to your enemy. Thus the game can still be a draw.

regwon says it better...

In objective based missions there are two ways to win:

1) Having captured more uncontested objectives than your opponent when the game ends

or,

2) Removing all of your opponents models from the game (often called 'Tabling')



If the situation arose where you no longer had any troops left on the table (as only troops choices can capture objectives) then the only way to win would be to kill everything in your opponents army.

Rulebook, page 90 wrote:Regardless of the victory conditions, if at the end of any standard mission your enemy has no units left on the table, you win the game!

More realistically, the player with no troops can easily force a draw in an objective mission by either killing all the troops of the other player, or else simply contesting all of the objectives with non-troop units.

Muggzy wrote:I am a newbie to V5 so pardon my ignorance...

When I have been at the LGS lately watching games of 40K I have seen many discussions, some heated, that result from one person killing all of the opponents troop choices.

Basically the argument stems from one guy declaring he is the winner because he has killed all of the opponents "troops" so there is no way for the opponent to take any objectives and therefore the game should end. Usually the opponent that has no troops left is saying they want to keep going to see how many more guys he can kill with his non "troop" units and somehow "win".

So, am I just lucky and seeing a specific scenerio that depends on "troops" and this is a non issue on other scenerios?

What do you do when playing and you have either killed all of your opponents troops or have lost all of yours?

2 out of the 3 mission objectives from the main rules require holding objectives with scoring units. In 5e, only non-vehicle, non-swarm Troops selections are scoring units. However, any unit can contest an objective, so even an army with no scoring units can still force a draw. Also, if you can table your opponent, you win regardless of objective.

...

usernamesareannoying wrote:...

See my reply.

Wow, this has become quite the pile-on....

too much simu typing...

It's often possible to draw for objectives and then win by VPs.

Agreed with the interpretations above. Just because you've eliminated the opponent's scoring units, doesn't mean that you eliminated the possibility of a loss or a draw. The game may be yours to lose at that time, but both players should finish the game.

Webbe wrote:It's often possible to draw for objectives and then win by VPs.

What page is that on?
I can only find Kill Points.

Eric

MagickalMemories wrote:

Webbe wrote:It's often possible to draw for objectives and then win by VPs.

What page is that on?
I can only find Kill Points.

Eric

Victory Points are on pg. 300 of the hardbound rulebook. They are optional; you'll want to consult with your opponent.

It's a reasonable misunderstanding, given the conditions that have already been mentioned. One reason I hate the standard missions is because, ultimately, everygame boils down to an 'Annhilation' mission. I miss some of the older missions, like Recon etc where there was purpose beyond just slaughtering everthing your opponent has. This is a major problem with 5e imo.

MagickalMemories wrote:

Webbe wrote:It's often possible to draw for objectives and then win by VPs.

What page is that on?
I can only find Kill Points.

Eric

In the reference section. Page 300 in the big book and page 108 in the small.
As already has been said those rules are optional.
Personally I hate ties in all games. VPs are a good tie-breaker.

I'm not a big fan of KPs either so sometimes I ask my opponent if he wants to skip the KPs and go only VPs instead.

Rymafyr wrote:It's a reasonable misunderstanding, given the conditions that have already been mentioned. One reason I hate the standard missions is because, ultimately, everygame boils down to an 'Annhilation' mission. I miss some of the older missions, like Recon etc where there was purpose beyond just slaughtering everthing your opponent has. This is a major problem with 5e imo.

I compeletly agree, It annoys me greatly that I have to so many points on troops only to watch them get blown away in the assult phase when im trying to hold objectives.

Most games really just turn into more strategic anihilation games where you wind up going after each others troops or their most deadly troop killing units...

Luckally for me I still have my 4th ed rulebook so I can grab senarios from there

Ah... that would explain it.
I haven't even LOOKED at the optional rules. All we use are the standard ones.

(I like KP)

Thanks.


Eric

Some of us had to look at them, since they were used in the US GTs.................................
And they're a lot better than KP...............................

Don... I gotta disagree with you.
I prefer the streamlined nature of KP.

Yes. It can be unbalanced, but that's the way the cookie crumbles. It's just part of the game. Also, I think some of this (like IG, for example) will be fixed soon).

/OT threadjack

Eric

I like VP's as a tie breaker.

As it stands KP are disproportionate for certain armies (notably IG, but that may change soon, depending on GW)

And that's what they were used for at the US GTs, as tie breakers. Tie objectives or KP, then you checked VPs to see if someone won by that standard.