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.

The tricky thing is, what if say Tau were attacking an ork fort? The tau would, for the most part sit there and shoot them off the fort while the orks firepower is far less than that of thre Tau etc.

So the objective will have to be clearer or more defined to ensure that races have to get in there and ensure a somewhat even fight.

Guard vs orks, means the orks will be charging the guard and the guard will be return firing until they meet in combat. The same thing cant be said about all races.

So to make a hold out mission you will need to come up with an objective that means the races will need to get close and try take the fort without it becoming a shooting match.

 Swastakowey wrote:
The tricky thing is, what if say Tau were attacking an ork fort? The tau would, for the most part sit there and shoot them off the fort while the orks firepower is far less than that of thre Tau etc.

So the objective will have to be clearer or more defined to ensure that races have to get in there and ensure a somewhat even fight.

Guard vs orks, means the orks will be charging the guard and the guard will be return firing until they meet in combat. The same thing cant be said about all races.

So to make a hold out mission you will need to come up with an objective that means the races will need to get close and try take the fort without it becoming a shooting match.

Definitely; I'm probably gonna see if I can hammer out a siege mission over the next few days. The ones available in Stronghold Assault leave me a bit wanting, as they're essentially just the same old missions rehashed with forced FoC picks.

Sounds good, let me know how it goes.

As an objective say the defenders are linked by an under ground network. They get reinforcements through a hole in the ground at the center of the fort.

The only way to close this hole is by getting a grenade in the hole.

I dont know how many reinforcements come in a turn but something like this will mean the attacker has no choice but to try get into the fort and kill off all the defenders.

Maybe...

 Swastakowey wrote:
Sounds good, let me know how it goes.

As an objective say the defenders are linked by an under ground network. They get reinforcements through a hole in the ground at the center of the fort.

The only way to close this hole is by getting a grenade in the hole.

I dont know how many reinforcements come in a turn but something like this will mean the attacker has no choice but to try get into the fort and kill off all the defenders.

Maybe...

That's a good idea to make it more universal. Won't be much fun being a besieged ork suffering the full might of an IG Basilisk column!

Bang on man.

Heaps of possibilities as well.

 Dakkamite wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
Wow, that batrep blows the more recent ones out of the water in a very unfun way.

Lol, theres a reason long timer gamers look fondly on old white dwarf and scorn the new garbage.

As a 20-year 40K player, I wholeheartedly agree with this statement.