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'm a huge fan of 1 on 1 battles. But being a step father with a tyranid stepson and a chaos marine step son they like to team up against their IG stepdad. We just make sure the the points are equal. Sometimes we even skirmish a 4 man scramble where its 4 armys on the board and everyman for himself or 2 on 2. or 3 on me when the kids have a friend over (i have a spare ork army for friends that spend the night). I was just wondering if other people do this and how they organize it or do any custom rules for it.

For free-for-all battles we have come up with the following idea.

- Points obviously should be balanced ( unless you agree on some thematic special scenario ).
- Deployment can be done in various ways depending on the number of players and the objective.
A) Table quarters with an agreed minimum distance to separate opposing forces.
B) The table is divided into roughly equal length starting lines ( "horseshoes" on the corners plus the middle of both long table edges ). Depth of starting deployment area can be negotiated but is usually 12".
C) "Chaos Factor". The Table is divided into squares. Anything not put into reserves is deployed into a randomized square. Non-DS reserves arrive randomly from any table edge.

Hope this gives you some inspiration.

My group of friends play 2vs2, 2vs3, or 3vs3 more often than any one of us in particular go head to head with one another. Its kind of a social get-away thing for us and we do not have enough tables to all get together but organize three different games.

If we have even number we just each roll for teams. We pair highest roller with lowest roller, re-rolling ties for highest or lowest as necessary. Pretty straightforward.

1vs2: Person who has two armies or enough of one to fulfill two force organization requirements does so and puts his two forces against a team made up of the other two people.

It stops scaling as easily when you have 2vs3 and so on. :(

We play a fair number of 2 on 2 battles.

They're easy to do, since you can just play straight out of the rulebook, treating one team as one player.

We've had a bit more difficulty with 4 player free for alls. The trick there is making sure that you play on either a square board (so that it doesn't become two separate games of 1v1) or a mission that really encourages players to get involved with all of their opponents.

To choose teams we just all roll a die and when two people roll the same they're a team.

We Play multi player battle and have had some great times doing so.

Try to get loyalties the same if possible on each side, i.e. Imperial Guard, Space marine, Sister of Battle.

If it not possible then the fun can really begin. Not only are they fighting a common enemy (Enemy of my enemy's my Friend) but if the no enemy available there's nothing wrong with thinning down your allies, more glory for you later. This approach has been so popular that by the end of the games there generally only 1 or 2 player left standing.

Played them quite often, we just set a points limit for either side then split them accordingly between players.

If it was a 1vs2 match, the the one player would have 2000pts, and the two allied players would have 1000pts each.

2vs3 Would be two teams of 1000pts vs three teams of 666pts and so on and so on


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Harms66 wrote:
Try to get loyalties the same if possible on each side, i.e. Imperial Guard, Space marine, Sister of Battle.

We also try to do this where possible, makes more sense than having choas allied with Marines

HellsGuardian316 wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

Harms66 wrote:
Try to get loyalties the same if possible on each side, i.e. Imperial Guard, Space marine, Sister of Battle.

We also try to do this where possible, makes more sense than having choas allied with Marines

We've had this happen, we threw in a rule that if no enemy was visible they had to shoot at their allies. Made for some interesting moment of vehicles to limit this.

I don't entirely agree with always playing loyalists vs everyone else. I think that it's more fun to mix up the teams, making sure that the games are as different as possible.

However, we don't have this problem, as usually the four of us show up with orks, necrons, nids, and chaos. So there really aren't any obvious teams.

(our backstory is frequently 'well, the orks looted the necrons, and the nids are... chaos nids...) or (The hive mind got caught up in a waagh, and the chaos guys worship necrons... Khornate necrons....)

Harms66 wrote:

HellsGuardian316 wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

Harms66 wrote:
Try to get loyalties the same if possible on each side, i.e. Imperial Guard, Space marine, Sister of Battle.

We also try to do this where possible, makes more sense than having choas allied with Marines

We've had this happen, we threw in a rule that if no enemy was visible they had to shoot at their allies. Made for some interesting moment of vehicles to limit this.

Good idea, will suggest this at our next 3+ game

Imperial Fist wrote:I'm a huge fan of 1 on 1 battles. But being a step father with a tyranid stepson and a chaos marine step son they like to team up against their IG stepdad. We just make sure the the points are equal. Sometimes we even skirmish a 4 man scramble where its 4 armys on the board and everyman for himself or 2 on 2. or 3 on me when the kids have a friend over (i have a spare ork army for friends that spend the night). I was just wondering if other people do this and how they organize it or do any custom rules for it.

The only hairy situation is assault phase really, and also if you go in the order of:

Player 1
Player 2
Player 3
Player 1
Player 2
Player 3

or in some other order.

I myself have always enjoyed the multi player battles.