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.

So My friend and I just started a campaign, it is still under developement and so we are adjusting some rules as needed. One of the things I really want to have in the campaign is a cinimatic game of an army trying to land on a hostile world and secure and foot hold so that they can attack other locations on that planet. So in the campaign the only way to land on a planet is to win a Planet Strike game.

The problem is that the Planet Strike rules and missions can some times be really one sided and are not very balanced. So in a campaign setting this would be frustrating for some players because they may never be able to land on a planet.

So keeping the idea of that type of game is there a way to tweak the planet strike rules to make them more balanced or maybe even come up with an Eternal War style mission that would give you the same feel? I have tried to think about changing some rules for planet strike but it just seems like a complete rewrite might be need for that. So I am thinking more of coming up with my own mission. The following would be some ideas for it. I would like any feed back and suggestions.

1) Roll for deployment as for the EW missions. Place terrain as in the book.

2) The attacker always goes first with no sieze the inititaive available.

3) The attacker splits his forces into 2 equal parts and puts all units in reserve. His first turn one of the chosen army halves comes in automatically. The rest uses the BRB rules for reserves.

4) The defender splits his army in half also. He deploys 1 half in his zone and the other goes into reserve.

5) There is a Bastion with any upgrade that is put in the middle of the board, this would have the void shield stratagem from the planet strike game. The defender must deploy one unit inside it and/or 1 unit on top, dont need infiltate for this. The bastion is the objective, it is worth 3 VP's and you have to be inside to claim it (So unilke the rules that don't allow units to claim something while in a building). I would like to maybe have the option for the attacker to get VP's if he blows up the bastion, but that may make it a little easier for the atatcker.

6) There would be a firestorm just like in planet strike but it will be D3+1 instead of D6+1 (S9*Ap3* Ordnance L Blast)

7) All the secondary objectives would be in effect and warlord traits will be used. Nightfighting as normal as well has game length.

I am a little uncertain about the VP aspect of it but I think I could make it work. Having the attacker come in from reserve makes it so he can't charge the bastion first turn and the void shield will help a little to keep it alive. I think that I might have infiltrators work as normal, seems fluffy to have a couple sneeky guys in there.

We just have had so much fun and much better games in 6th with the eternal war missions and the planet strike games haven't been as fun. tell me what you think. It is a real rough idea so far but I think it can work.

Thanks

I don't like Planet Strike. If the defender knows what he is doing, and has access to a large assortment of terrain, it is almost impossible for the attacker to win.

If you want cinematic, then you have to consider a few things.

First, a defending force is rarely surprised as to when the initial planetary assault is going to happen. It could take weeks for a ship to move from their entry point in the system to a position over the planet to begin dropping troops.

This means the defenders have the opportunity to dig in ahead of time. Also, if the defenders are paying attention to where the enemy ships have entered orbit then it becomes more obvious what the initial landing sites are going to be and the defenders have at least a few hours to move troops around, if necessary.

So for force selection; I'd let the defenders swap out Fast Attack slots for Heavy ones as they want; so they could take 6 heavies for example. I'd also let the attackers do the reverse: swap heavy slots for fast attack. Again, to represent that the defender had the chance to get the big guns in place while the attackers are sending their fastest units in.

The defender shouldn't be forced to put anything into reserves, but they should be forced to deploy first. Once the defender is all set up, then the attacker should deploy.

Next roll for who actually goes first with no seize. I think you ought to roll instead of just giving it to the attacker because it is unlikely this attack is a surprise. I don't think any bonuses ought to be conferred to either side because the defender saw them coming, but the attacker chose the moment to strike so it kind of cancels each other out. Although I wouldn't be opposed to adding each warlords initiative to the die roll; which is something I think works for all games.

#4: That would work. Another thought is just to force the attacker to put anything in reserve that *can* deep strike. If I did this then I'd ignore the rule on auto losing if the attacker has nothing on the table at the end of any game turn prior to 4. This would give them time to get the troops in place and could represent some of the attacker forces jumping the gun by running ahead of their main force...

#5, I think having a single objective like that is a good idea.. Whether it's a bastion or some type of control station isn't material. The way to look at it is that the attacker is trying to secure some type of system (like the planetary defense batteries) in order to begin the full assault. In order to move things forward, you might consider destruction of the objective as a viable attacker strategy. Getting back to the planetary defense guns, it would be like destroying that control board. Of course, in a campaign you would want to give a bonus to the attacker in a later game for holding it (instead of outright destruction) in order to encourage them to attempt to take it over. Maybe something like a free barrage shot per game for the rest of the campaign. Also you might give 2VP for it's destruction and 3VP for capture. We tend to use a skyshield landing pad with a nearby control center as objectives. The skyshield is worth 3VP is the sides are unfurled (representing a lowering of shields or opening the doors) and 1VP if it's still furled.

If you find attackers winning too often, you could make this more difficult by having 2 of them on the board, but the attacker doesn't know which is which until they get a scoring unit within 3". The defender on the other hand would know the entire time. The *wrong* objective would only be worth 1VP (or none). You'd have to write it down ahead of time though. This would represent perhaps faulty intelligence received by the attacker.

#6: I haven't personally seen firestorm be that big a deal; so I have no opinion here.

#7: sounds good.