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 was thinking of trying a new game with my friends where the only VP you can obtain is linebreaker.

- No vehicles exceeding 33 total armor(front + side + rear)
- No jump infantry, jet pack infantry, flyers, beasts, cavalry, bikes, jet bikes, fast, ect
- No reserves, or special deployment
- No special movement like Veill of Darkness, teleport, ect...
- No 2+ saves

Point limit: 500 points

Game takes place on a 24x48" table. Starts with each player silently bidding for how far their line will be into the board / how far into the board they believe they can defend. The player who bids the lowest becomes the attacker and deploys first with a 6" deployment zone from their board edge. The defender can deploy up to the line they bidded for from their board edge.

The game is won when linebreaker has been achieved by the attacker or a player has been annihilated, otherwise the defending player wins when the game ends. The defender cannot gain linebreaker.

I was wondering if there was any rules you might add or take away to make the game as interesting as possible. The game is basically set up so that the defender should try to set up in such a way to exploit cover and create "kill zones" against the player who is attempting to break his line.

Bidding is silly and over complicated. You should just set the Line at the edge of the defender's standard deployment zone, and whoever deploys first is the defender.

Allowing the attacker to deploy 'up to' the defence line basically negates any balancing you've achieved by preventing special deployment. Effectively, you've said the attacker can deploy along the line, move 1" forward, then Go to Ground every turn until the game ends and thus win. There needs to be a 'no-man's land' for the attacker to cross into the teeth of heavy fire.

Another problem is that you've crippled some armies completely. Banning everything except basic infantry and light vehicles basically means that Elysians can't play, Blood Angels can't play in character, Tau are limited to fire warriors and pathfinders (I can't think of a single other Tau player who thinks that a FW/Pathfinder army supported by Piranhas with lots of seeker missiles is cool)... you see where I'm going with this? The only armies that can operate effectively are Orks, DEldar and... well, maybe Marines.

The attacker deploys 6" from their board edge on a 24x48" board and must advance towards to the enemy line that was bidded for. Victory is achieved once a unit has crossed the line / broken the line.

The point of bidding is that before the battle starts, you get to see the terrain and the enemy army and decide on what distance you could go for to guarantee yourself victory. It'd be beneficial to have your line as far back as possible, but then the enemy could be using a lot of close range and close combat units which tells you he'll be bidding as far into the board as possible. The downside to the former tactic is it brings the victory condition closer to the enemy.

The "no man's land" is between the attacker's deployment zone and the defender's line.

The reason why there's no jump infantry, flyers or such is because victory would be incredibly easy if you could just jump and run to the line or turbo boost into the enemy's deployment zone. There's no heavy armor because you could cruise into the enemy line with it. There's no 2+ saves because a necron royal court with a res orb could walk through it with ease.

I think removing the bidding system defeats the purpose of what kind of game I was trying to make. It's not supposed to be a 500 point game on a small board, it's supposed to be a battle between players betting how much of the table they can control.

Sweeping bans for one army's problems does not a good scenario make.

I get the intent, I really do. But when your scenario involves close to a dozen banned items, your scenario is what needs re-working, not the bans.

I do not remember what edition it was but there was a scenario called table quarters. It's split the table into 4 and fight for each quarter. Instead of instant victory you need to hold. The scenario is way to easy for the attacker. In 500 points the main speed armies are nerfed (dark eldar). And hordes would win. boys in at truck supported by a mob or marines rhino rushing. And honestly a "race" scenario is all you are doing. When does an enemy win by reaching a certain point without killing everyone else.

The way the OP was written, it was the defender whose deployment zone was limited. As it is, you've gone too far the other way and basically said "There's no challenge. The defender wins because the attacker just has to footslog up the field towards his guns."

For very low points games, use restrictions based on Combat Patrol. No 3+ wound critters, AV 33+, flyers/FMC, and 2+ saves.

Bans definitely are needed at this points level, otherwise it turns into whose gimmick hard counters the other. However, the bans you've put in would make for a dull game, and I say this as one of the armies that would be immensely powerful under those rules (Orks)