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.

Yes, I know ANOTHER ITC thread but there opinions getting flung everywhere and not many people are actually saying how much, experience they have, if any with the ruleset.

Hopefully I included enough options to cover all the bases. I know how Dakka loves to point out missing poll options.

Not required to be ANOTHER topic about this.

Yes, I play ITC, and I have been playing ITC missions longer than most people. I even wrote a Pro ITC article back in 2016 for the FLG website, found here: https://www.frontlinegaming.org/2016/06/01/the-current-state-of-40k-and-its-community/

Doesn't mean my opinion and outlook on the subject cannot change over time and as things evolve and change.

I have played ITC a few times, whether helping friends practice for a tournaments or playing in one myself, but "Not if I can help it." would be my prefered choice as I desperately dislike the secondaries set up.

Never have, reason why is simple.

I read through the ITC missions and read the CA. I simply prefer the CA. I think it sounds more fair. Allows for more randomness and unpredictability which means adaptive play styles.

Our game group doesn't write lists to the mission, we write what we think is a good all rounder and then whatever the mission it's up to us to adapt.

We also like to adapt and homebrew our own things now and then. e.g. teraain, sometimes we will have a kill tema board set up on the side (designed to in a building). When two opposing unit enter a building, we switch over to the kill team board (yes i know not all units are in kill team but we adapt) and have a mini game of kill team for what happens while inside. Unit can leave the kill team board and exit the building and for the big table they simply count as "fell back". Doesn't matter if a unit is on its own as the kill team board is only effective whilst enemy units are in same terrain.

Usually a 3-round RTT each month and two or three 5-round GT's a year. I can't really get the time off work to go to a major.

Due to life and the fact that the local store closed down I do not have as much gaming time as I would like.

The closest store has events every so often and if my schedule lines up, I will go, so I am forced to play what ever rule set they are doing, which is normally ITC.

But, in mid March they will be doing the Adepticon mission pack. https://www.adepticon.org/wpfiles/2020/202040KChampPacketDraft.pdf to help the local players who are going to that at the end of March.

Only for events, for pick up games no.

I have in the past but usually don't unless it's requested. I like to use the first-floor rule though.

Our gaming community is like 95% ITC right now...

It's a good system I guess, but relies waaaaay too much on magic boxes and no LOS shooting now. Which basically means TFCs or AM artillery on every table.

Boring.

I do a couple major events a year our local group also alternates between ITC and GW tournaments. I wont say one system is better than the other they both have their ups and downs. I will say I think the first floor blocking LOS is very good. I think that rule should be a standard rule just because otherwise the game devolves into a shooting gallery. That being said I think ITC takes it a bit too far and you should never have 100% enclosed ruins. There should always be open sided so you can maneuver to get shots off.

Zero interest in any kind of tournament setting, so no...it has no purpose beyond tournaments.

No. It doesn't play a role in my gaming group and nobody is interested in it, GW missions or our own missions are good enough.

Tried it a few times in practice games and the odd small event, the peak of which was one GT. By the end of day 2 I was bored out of my skull, so much so that I rather wished I had done a weekend of overtime instead.

Not touched it for nearly two years now, no real desire to play it again.

A few times, but ITC is really not popular where I live and from what I've seen and played, I prefer the CA2018 and 2019 missions (especially CA2019 missions, in fact).

 Elbows wrote:
Zero interest in any kind of tournament setting, so no...it has no purpose beyond tournaments.

What he said.

See, if I wanted to play ITC then I'd go to a tourney.

But I don't want to play in a tourney environment & I don't want it polluting casual play. Keep your tourney crap in your tourneys.

I play ITC missions mostly.

I think the first-floor blocking is good.
I'm not entirely keen on how more than half the points come from killing the enemy, though. At the same time, though games feel a lot closer a lot of the times, and with more potential for a comeback if you're down.

With some of the normal missions, I've felt that playing very fast very aggressive melee armies can just dominate through early aggression, because they reward heavy pressure early and if it's turn 3 or 4 and you're still down your odds of coming back up seem short.
I played CA2019 "Lockdown" in my most recent game, and I took an early lead on objectives from the first two turns that my opponent was completely unable to come back from despite me ceeding ground every turn thereafter.

This was already an effect I noticed in the previous CA missions from 2018, where controlling the middle early seemed to decide the game. Controlling the middle still decides the game in ITC to some degree, but it feels easier to come back from being boxed in if you can blunt the enemy offensive.


I don't dislike the CA2019 missions, though. ITC missions really only work at 2k, so for smaller games CA it is. I'm also increasingly partial to the old-fashioned missions. I'm interested in trying out the new Maelstrom missions, since they look interesting [I also own an objective deck now courtesy of the Sisters box]. I never likes Maelstrom before, but it looks way less obnoxiously random now and might be interesting.

Same response as the other topic, no, don't see a need to, I only play casual and if we want to house rule it our local group can do a better job(and we have, combining the best bits of 3rd-7th in one rule set. we did it in about a 2 hour group discussion of what worked and what didn't to make the game enjoyable. thus allowing any codex to be used for any army in those editions by just having it based in 5th ed core rules)

Yes. Until very recently they were the norm for casual games too. Recently transitioned to CA missions (maelstrom) for casual games, however.

No ITC for me, I avoid tournaments and the tournament community.

Nope. Don't see the point for any kind of games.

Mostly I only play it it people other than me want to play it.
There is a lot of book keeping #1 - need to come prepared with a pen and paper or print outs. Then the scoring phase every turn. There are the really bad rules for first floor LOS blocking - which some people like but it discourages actual army interaction so it's pretty hard to not to see that as bad in a game that is supposed to be fun. Then there is the terrible building list to mission phenomenon which encourages certain kinds of list which are "hard to score against" which is particularly lame and has nothing to do with 40k whatsoever.

CA mission with a random dice to decide the mission is more fun / more fair / and more interesting. The biggest issue with this format is the dice roll to go first and seize the initiative have too much influence but at least the game is fun. Setting the board up with proper terrain can fix this. IMO you should be able to hide about half (or less) of your army but not the entire thing. If you can hide your whole army the game because exceedingly lame. I expect it in tournaments but the local ones around here don't use enough terrain for it to be a real problem - they do use ITC format though.

People who play locally to me are generally only vaguely aware it exists. Never known anyone in the store to actually play an ITC mission.

With some exceptions of course, it primarily seems to be a US thing.

Most games where I live are ITC format, losing the magic boxes was a good step but I still think most battlefields need more traversable terrain like actual open buildings.