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.

New missions are sorely needed, hopefully they'll be more "tourney oriented" than "fluffy". The game needs more spice in its actual semi competitive pick up and play sphere, it's got enough duneonmasterfights with planetstrike and apoc now.

I wonder if the missions will continue to be symmetrical, as in each side has the same objective. Missions where both sides have different objectives are far more fun.

Missions where the other player doesn't know what the opposing player's mission is can also be fun.

H.B.M.C. wrote:I wonder if the missions will continue to be symmetrical, as in each side has the same objective. Missions where both sides have different objectives are far more fun.

Missions where the other player doesn't know what the opposing player's mission is can also be fun.

Unfortunately those fall under the "fluffy" sphere, as unequal objective missions are really hard to balance without a static build. I guess I'll have to hope for a mix of symmetrical starcraft fights and Asymmetrical objective games. You're right though, those are missing from the rulebook.

ShumaGorath wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:I wonder if the missions will continue to be symmetrical, as in each side has the same objective. Missions where both sides have different objectives are far more fun.

Missions where the other player doesn't know what the opposing player's mission is can also be fun.

Unfortunately those fall under the "fluffy" sphere, as unequal objective missions are really hard to balance without a static build. I guess I'll have to hope for a mix of symmetrical starcraft fights and Asymmetrical objective games. You're right though, those are missing from the rulebook.

Its like what, 30 missions? I'm sure they'll try to appeal to as many members of their playerbase as possible. If we all know one thing, its that GW loves money.

Shummy wrote:Unfortunately those fall under the "fluffy" sphere, as unequal objective missions are really hard to balance without a static build.

Not really.

Think of the way 2nd Ed did missions. You drew a card, and that was your objective. Now, granted, virtually every mission was a VP mission, so you could theoretically ignore your mission and just go for the VP win, but the mission objectives allowed players to try to do very different things to one another.

Then there are the 'Rules of Engagement' that came out in 3rd (4th?)? That was essentially a way of randomising missions.

Each player had two objective markers, and there were about 11 different mission types. Some missions asked you to hold your objectives, some asked you to hold your opponent's, some asked you to hold one of each, hold as many as you could and some even ignored the objectives altogether. Each mission type had its own mission special rules (so you might have Deep Strike, and they might have Infiltrate), and both players could have different objectives (ie. I have to hold my two objectives, and he has to take mine). The deployment zones were also randomised, so any mission could be quarters, L-shaped or simple side-to-side.

They made games different, as both sides often had a different objective. No need for alternate Forge Orgs or other such things (like Planetstrike or the 'Advanced' 40K missions like Breakout and Meatgrinder). Honestly, if they included that along with the 30 other missions, it would be good.

I'm pretty sure that the book will also contain a set of guidelines for creating your own missions, along with the promise of the GW site and WD having some minor additions over time.

Candroth wrote:(WHY DO THEY HAVE TO LIVE A THOUSAND MILES AWAY)

I hear that(and share in your pain).


I have high hopes for this book, including hoping for a couple PS, CoD, and Apoc missions thrown in the mix.

Commander Endova wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:I wonder if the missions will continue to be symmetrical, as in each side has the same objective. Missions where both sides have different objectives are far more fun.

Missions where the other player doesn't know what the opposing player's mission is can also be fun.

Unfortunately those fall under the "fluffy" sphere, as unequal objective missions are really hard to balance without a static build. I guess I'll have to hope for a mix of symmetrical starcraft fights and Asymmetrical objective games. You're right though, those are missing from the rulebook.

Its like what, 30 missions? I'm sure they'll try to appeal to as many members of their playerbase as possible. If we all know one thing, its that GW loves money.

True, I guess my biggest hope is that they segment them according to the kind of missions they are "competitive, fluffy, mix".

Then there are the 'Rules of Engagement' that came out in 3rd (4th?)? That was essentially a way of randomising missions.

I started in third. The asymmetrical missions were rarely balanced in my view. I can't really speak to second edition though.

The asymmetrical missions in the 3rd Ed rulebook, yes, I agree. The 'Rules of Engagement' ones were far simpler than that, and allowed for differing mission objectives.

And keep in mind that it's "differing" objectives, not "opposed" mission objectives. So it's a case of one side having a "Kill the enemy commander" while the other player has "hold the quarters" rather than "Kill the enemy commander" and "don't let the enemy kill my commander".

Apocalypse Reload has some lovely personal secondary objectives for commanders to pursue.

You know, this is something that has occurred to me.

What if, in place of the "standard" 40k rules being used for tournament play...

They brought back a more balanced version of Kill Teams for it?

Kanluwen wrote:You know, this is something that has occurred to me.

What if, in place of the "standard" 40k rules being used for tournament play...

They brought back a more balanced version of Kill Teams for it?

I would personally deuce my pants with joy if they brought back Kill-Tem or some form of =I=munda style game. K.T. was one thing I missed a tonne when I switched to 5th. Though if they did that, they'd need to include a 'swap sprue' with all kinds of abstract heads/arms/weapons/armour/etc... on it.

I hope the Basilisk is going to be like the new Demolisher and Hellhound kits: you can choose between X variants. I'm going to build a Medusa, but I'm waiting on buying the *old* Basilisk, as I'm afraid that there will be a Medusa kit released. I also hope there will be a new standard Leman Russ kit.

/Leaf

Whats the point of a plastic warboss kit? They only have 1 option.. Power klaw

and i guess 'uge choppa for people who want their warboss to really not accomplish a whole lot

I never did Kill Team myself. What was in it that wouldn't work in 5th?

but some people want to give him different guns etc... plus GW likes to say look new model go and buy it now Kthnxbi

Kirasu wrote:Whats the point of a plastic warboss kit? They only have 1 option.. Power klaw

Maybe there will be a bike in it...

You know, now that I think of it.

Guys, gals, its, they say they will be based off of black library novels.

Invasion.

I'm afraid that this new pack of gak is the warning of this.

Warlaser 40k: The dawn of Multilasers.

I cannot believe nobody saw this coming.

This thread lacks certain elements of Multilasers.

No doubt we will have Landrazors, tank surfing, and the best yet, multilasers, in the 30 missions.

Oh, I wonder how GW will balance my razorback changing into a land raider every one of my opponents phases.

Aswell as my razorback having a trans. capacity of 20, seeing as 10 inside, 10 on the sides and top.

I can't wait for the Kill Team mission where you get a single Firewarrior and destroy several squads of Marines, Chaos Marines and a Titan - all by yourself!

Karon wrote:Guys, gals, its, they say they will be based off of black library novels.

In that case, time to dust off my Eldar, becase Eldar are made of WIN!

I never understood the attraction to killteam. The games rules aren't complicated enough for it to be exciting or fun in a small scale.

Karon wrote:You know, now that I think of it.

Guys, gals, its, they say they will be based off of black library novels.

Invasion.

I'm afraid that this new pack of gak is the warning of this.

Warlaser 40k: The dawn of Multilasers.

I cannot believe nobody saw this coming.

This thread lacks certain elements of Multilasers.

No doubt we will have Landrazors, tank surfing, and the best yet, multilasers, in the 30 missions.

Oh, I wonder how GW will balance my razorback changing into a land raider every one of my opponents phases.

Aswell as my razorback having a trans. capacity of 20, seeing as 10 inside, 10 on the sides and top.

Come to think of it, Terminators might get a +1 to their I in this case, in order to accurately represent their secret ability to backflip

If Kill Team makes a come back, I do hope that they make the rules for the goon squads more attractive and simpler to use. I was always stuck playing as the goons and that's never fun.

Does anyone have the PDF for Kill Team by any chance? I know it was up on GW ages and ages ago, but I don't think I ever downloaded it.

I've got both PDF files hidden away somewhere I think.

While plastic kans and deff dreads and a warboss box all sounds good, Orks are still missing a few things;

Wazdakka
Zogwort
Flash Gitz

Since most of the special characters are GW Exclusives, it wouldn't surprise me in the least if all we got was the last of our special characters. Flash Gitz would be nice, but actually, all we'd need is a Snazzgun sprue box, and I'm sure people would eat it up (myself included). I look forward to seeing what comes out. If it's Plastic Killa Kans, I'll buy the 8 I still need on the spot.

Commander Endova wrote:If we all know one thing, its that GW loves money.

Yes.

Commander Endova wrote:I'm sure they'll try to appeal to as many members of their playerbase as possible.

No.

H.B.M.C. wrote:I can't wait for the Kill Team mission where you get a single Firewarrior and destroy several squads of Marines, Chaos Marines and a Titan - all by yourself!

Someone really didn't like the premise of a certain videogame and the book that was based on it, ey?

Karon wrote:Guys, gals, its, they say they will be based off of black library novels.

*crosses fingers for rules and a model für Cain and Jugen*

ShumaGorath wrote:I never understood the attraction to killteam. The games rules aren't complicated enough for it to be exciting or fun in a small scale.

There once have been some additional rules in a WD, introducing things like "Boss Fights", which was kinda cool. But I know what you mean.

Anung Un Rama wrote:Someone really didn't like the premise of a certain videogame and the book that was based on it, ey?

Firewarrior was a fun book. Terrible, terrible, awful, horrible game, but a fun book. That said, suspension of disbelief goes out the window when he kills about 20+ Marines single-handedly. And the book has so many Deus Ex Machinas it's not funny.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Does anyone have the PDF for Kill Team by any chance? I know it was up on GW ages and ages ago, but I don't think I ever downloaded it.

Sadly, they're not up on GW's site anymore. I think GW's legal team sent a C&D letter to GW for hosting those files last month...

Which is probably only slightly siller and perhaps only very slightly less likely than Fox try to sue The Simpsons for making fun of Fox News.

Vale,

JohnS

This sounds like a very fun birthday (yes, my birthday is in march, horay for me )

Tasty mission book with lots of varied updated models.. needs more tau... then again tau models are pretty set from all the 4th editon boxes.

I have personaly built 3 killa kans for a friend and let me tell you... they are some of the WORST metal i've worked with.. Not even some pinning can save them from construction faults ):

Also i agree with more IG plastics. Plastic artilery kit would be lovely imo since the bassy has a min range of 24" (Which is kinda buggered in non-apoc games imho)

Yay for more spesh marein plastics... Pleast tell me they have a plastic commander boreial model?