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.

It can work decently well with something along the lines of a BAO scenario whereby there is a primary adn secondary set of missions.

a really big factor in making it work is setting up the deployment zones. Every player MUST be equidistant from the other, otherwise you will inevitably get a 2v1 scenario. So getting the table balance right is critical.

Might want to remove FB as a VP, or have like a first and second blood. Similarly you have to consider stuff like interceptor shots too.

Finally like 10 white dwarfs back (maybe even januaray of last year? it was an issue or 2 before the stormtalon released or along those lines) there were rules for "death worlds" whereby each turn each player rolled on the deathworld table and bad stuff happened to everyone. This made 1v1v1 at lot more fun because in some scenariors it was more about survival than shooting each other. It's important to have world based events going on because that can become somewhat of a virtual "fourth" player which then starts to balance things out again.

This thread has given me an idea for a 1v1v1 scenario and let me know what you guys think!

IT's modelled after the BAO scenarios which i think are pretyt balanced by having the primary and secondary main objectives. So Since 2 work fors 1v1 I figured on 3 for 1v1v1

Deployment: an equiliateral triangle with everyone 4 feet apart, and instead of deploying per side you just get a bubble of deployment. This also means there will be a foot of no mans land on either side of the board whiiich im okay

with, leaves some maneuvering room.

Primary Mission (4 points): the relic, in the center of the triangle.

Secondary Mission (3 points): 3 objectives, 1 in the center of each "edge" of the triangle, this means that NO player starts holding an objective (so no just sitting back and twiddling your thumbs waiting for your opponents to kill each

other), and furthermore your 2 nearest objectvies are also nearest your respective opponents, should help double teaming!

Tertiary Mission (3 points): Secret objectives! One thing im pulling from the kill team rules, d6 secret objectives and you roll on the table at the beginning of the game. Some of them include
1. Getting a scoring unit to the highest point on the map
2. Killing a specific model in an enemy unit
3. protecting an enemy unit?
4. Captuyring some sort of radio/something on the board
5. have a unit on all 4 quarters at the end of the game

The goal of the tertiary mission is to add some randomness to the table and potentially force people to move across the board to get what they need (or even into no-mans land). Now there is a thing in kill team where if you announce your secret objectrive you get a point for that. Could be interesting....

Finally there is still linebreaker and warlord, but NO FB

Total amount of points in the game 4 + 3 + (3x3) + 2 for 18 points total. Total any one person can claim though is 4+3+3+2 for 11.


Also these will all be using deathworld rules too (aka: the world can hurt you each player turn!) just cause they are fun

Now as for some rules addendums:

No you cant TARGET into a CC that doesnt involve you. Buttt if blasts happen to hit there or whatnot that's all still hunky dorey
Yes you can join CC that doesnt involve you (just use rules for CC with multiple units)

You CAN however tank shock into a CC that doesnt involve you, because it doesnt specifically target, you just give a distance. And tank shocking is hilarious.
1. Both units make morale
2. If one fails they break, no sweeping advance can be made by the other (cause, well, they're also avoiding the tank) and combat is broken
3. If they both pass then CC continues and the tank goes through them as if they werent there.
4. BOTH sides are allowed a chance to make a guts and glory charge, but you still go a-squishy if you fail

What others would there be?

The reason why I dont like targeting into CC is because it promotes the playstyle of one player hanging back and letting the other 2 attack each other.

Although logically sure no it doesnt make sense (though you could think of it as the command not wanted to potentailly have both of those targets suddenly go after him), it's a type of WAAC move that we're trying to minimize

Furthermore it sort of slows the flow of the game a LOT because the 2 players in CC would naturally want to very carfully manage their 3 inch move ins so that the enemy cc guys were the closest to the shooters.
What about LOS? what about challenges? what about 25% morale checks? If one side breaks due to the shooting does the other CC get to sweeping advance?

Edit: your 2 group ruling does allow for sweeping advances.. which is REALLY punishing to that poor unit. Having a blob is overall better because it at least somewhat mitigates ganging up one someone, since you always do nearest first, but it's still kinda just mean. Just think of it as our commanders are like eldar and thus conservative in order to not tick off 2 enemies at once and always look for an ally advantage.

All in all i just feel it's something which would unduly punish CC armies and promote static gunline combat in a 1v1v1 situation.