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 I proposed this to someone I played a game with the other day, I think the current rule regarding who controls an objective is sort of... wrong. I like objective secured, so with this proposal it could still work exactly the same way. To illustrate my point, here’s an example of when I think the current ruling is the MOST silly:

In one Army, a unit of scarab swarms is down to their last two models, and in the other Army is a full strength Knight, all within 3” of an objective. The scarabs control the objective in this scenario, and I don’t think that should be the case.

Here’s was my pitch:

I think it would be much more appropriate to use the “wounds” characteristic of all the models within 3” of the objective. And that could even be the current wounds remaining, to account for large things being less effective as they get damaged.

I think it'd make more sense to have an ObSec rule, called Objective Secured (X). Hell, it could even be a stat, if you wanted it to be on everything.

What that would do is X is how many models that model counts as for holding an Objective.

So an IG Infantry Squad (and other IG Troops with ObSec) could have ObSec (2). They each count as two models.
A Leman Russ, taken normally, could have ObSec (3), but when taken in an Imperial Guard Spearhead, that improves to ObSec (6) or something.

A Questoris or Dominous Knight could have ObSec (10) base, with warlord traits or relics or whatnot to modify it.

Edit: I don't think tying it straight to wounds is a good idea, though-Nurglings and similar would become absolute KINGS of holding objectives then.

 JNAProductions wrote:
I think it'd make more sense to have an ObSec rule, called Objective Secured (X). Hell, it could even be a stat, if you wanted it to be on everything.

What that would do is X is how many models that model counts as for holding an Objective.

So an IG Infantry Squad (and other IG Troops with ObSec) could have ObSec (2). They each count as two models.
A Leman Russ, taken normally, could have ObSec (3), but when taken in an Imperial Guard Spearhead, that improves to ObSec (6) or something.

A Questoris or Dominous Knight could have ObSec (10) base, with warlord traits or relics or whatnot to modify it.

Edit: I don't think tying it straight to wounds is a good idea, though-Nurglings and similar would become absolute KINGS of holding objectives then.

I love the idea of a "presence" statistic which more or less covers how intimidating a model is. EG a dreadnaught holding an objective is more of a problem than a marine holding it.

I'd look to have "Presence" as a statistic, and then Objective Secured which doubles Presence for objective purposes. Then use Presence to denote the units "size" in terms of outnumbering, to make hordes a little better - make outnumbering affect morale or something, to make it reasonable that if you lose models to a horde of gribblies, you have more chance of one or more models being dragged down under the weight of bodies!


As for a knight holding an objective, what is the objective? If it's a small device which you have to hold a button on to send a signal, well, the knight is going to be somewhat rubbish at that!

Personally don't think titanic models should be able to hold objectives at all. Or vehicles, except walkers. But that's just me being a grumpy ol' git.

See, this is why I posted here. These are great suggestions and I’d like to maybe propose them as house rules when I get a gaming group going.

As far as the reality of titanic units holding objectives, to me it more represent holding ground until the real forces or leaders get there. A Knight would be about as effective at pushing that button as a cultist would be trusted to. Lol. They’re both probably just there to make sure that button is secured and “press-able” for whoever is actually going to do it, after the battle.

 some bloke wrote:


As for a knight holding an objective, what is the objective? If it's a small device which you have to hold a button on to send a signal, well, the knight is going to be somewhat rubbish at that!

Personally don't think titanic models should be able to hold objectives at all. Or vehicles, except walkers. But that's just me being a grumpy ol' git.

Well, holding an objective is a rather abstract and ill defined thing in the game, in terms of what is actually occurring that it represents. Hold could simply be 'stop any enemy units getting close enough' which a Knight would probably excel at, or like you say it could be 'hold down this tiny button' which of course a Knight would not be much good at.

But yes as rbacus says, most holding of objectives could also represent merely having control of it so something can happen to the thing after the battle. I mean you don't really want your squad of Guardsmen to be picking up ancient chaos artifacts and holding them during the battle, as the Commissar would have to shoot them. (well, ok he's going to shoot them after the battle anyway for knowing about the Chaos artifact, but having them fighting during the battle is still useful!). I've also posted this elsewhere but this is part of why I think holding an objective in later turns should be more valuable than holding them in earlier turns.

Well, pushing a button is probably something that would require an action to accomplish. So the trade off there is that you're spending your 400+ point model's whole turn pressing a button instead of killing things.

I kind of like the idea of a "presence" stat. Characters, especially killy ones, could have a higher presence than the rank and file. Units that specialize in harassment/fear might be able to debuff enemy presence. Swooping Hawks having a Leadership buff aura is a little weird, but having a presence debuff attached to their grenade packs sounds on-brand for them.

Not sure I'd tie presence to morale/being spooky though. Night Lords are spooky and might reasonably make an enemy assault squad less good at holding an objective, but they themselves should probably not be better at holding a position than, say, imperial fists. My mandrakes are spooky and can freak some guardsmen out enough to make them bad at pushing the button, but said mandrakes probably shouldn't be good at claiming the objective while they're actively fighting some lychguard or bullgryn on top of it.

For a real twist to the game you could try making holding an objective an action to perform in the command phase, which would then make it significantly more difficult to just hold them with your main firepower. A knight could hold an objective, but it would prevent it from shooting or charging so it would be a bad decision.

I think this would also put a massive increase in the number of cheaper units on the field.

Maybe allow Objective Secured units to finish their action in the command phase, so troops become more useful!

The issue you run into with figuring out what holding an objective should be on the tabletop is that none of it jives with how a real army holds ground.

For a fixed point like a hill holding the hill may literally mean parking a unit on the hill and shooting enemies that try to take it from you. However, that hill can still be held if those same units push forward and sweep away the enemy in the nearby town allowing a rearguard unit to come by hours later and take up post on that same hill. At the same token, if the squad on the hill was under heavy fire that hill isn't really 'held' as you can't use it for anything until the enemy can be convinced to stop firing at it.

Given how tiny table sizes in 40k are and how long weapons ranges are I'd argue that nothing should count as held unless:

1) You have had a unit within 3" of it for a turn.
2) No enemy unit has been within 3" of the objective for a turn. (This allows you to take ground and move on)
3) No enemy unit has both range and line of sight to that objective.

Obviously, this isn't going to work with 40k as it is but the above is a more realistic idea of what holding ground would look like on a battlefield.

 Canadian 5th wrote:
The issue you run into with figuring out what holding an objective should be on the tabletop is that none of it jives with how a real army holds ground.

For a fixed point like a hill holding the hill may literally mean parking a unit on the hill and shooting enemies that try to take it from you. However, that hill can still be held if those same units push forward and sweep away the enemy in the nearby town allowing a rearguard unit to come by hours later and take up post on that same hill. At the same token, if the squad on the hill was under heavy fire that hill isn't really 'held' as you can't use it for anything until the enemy can be convinced to stop firing at it.

Given how tiny table sizes in 40k are and how long weapons ranges are I'd argue that nothing should count as held unless:

1) You have had a unit within 3" of it for a turn.
2) No enemy unit has been within 3" of the objective for a turn. (This allows you to take ground and move on)
3) No enemy unit has both range and line of sight to that objective.

Obviously, this isn't going to work with 40k as it is but the above is a more realistic idea of what holding ground would look like on a battlefield.

One of the missions has a good mechanic in that after you have claimed an objective it stays yours unless an opponent claims it back. IMOthis is what "raise banners" should do all the time, so you can spend an action to claim an objective and count on being able to hold the enemy back from it. In fact, this perhaps should be the only way to claim objectives.

That said, having a tank sat on an objectives will, ffectively, make it yours. So perhaps Troops should get the ability to raise banners by default, to give them a proper use. Objective Secured could be expanded to include actions and such.

Objective Secured:
(Disclaimer: this isn't written in legalese so is just an idea of how to play it and not the exact wording needed to make it work!)
Objective secured models count double for claiming objectives - EG if you have 3 objsec models and 2 non-objsec models in 3" of the objective, you score 8 for claiming it. Highest claimer wins.
Action: Raise Banners. start in command phase, completed at the end of your movement phase, uncontested objectives only. Until the opponent claims it, you count as scoring this objective, even if you have no models nearby.
Action: Sabotage. Started in the command phase, finish at the end of your turn. uncontested objectives only. Sabotaged objectives do not count as objectives.
Action: Defuse. Started at the end of your movement phase, completed at the end of your turn. Uncontested, Sabotages objectives only. Remove the "sabotaged" condition from the objective.

This would really boost the value of troops - allowing them to mark objectives as yours rather than having to sit on them, and allowing them to sab your opponents ones so that they have to fix them before they can score them. If your opponent brings no troops, and you sab their objectives, they're buggered.

Make several things possible and more than one kind of objective TO secure.
IE, there is a pile of objectives you can flip over at the start of the game and pick randomly from.

As a general theme, each subtype of "special primary secure objective" will have a couple units in any army that can "do it for free" and a single cp strategem allowing any army to "fake it" .. but only for the basic primary purpose, (hold one, hold more, etc) and only if that special objective is completely uncontested. The Princeps has to drag his butt out of his titan and crawl into the bunker to find the macguffin -- an engeneer team would just sort of do it without a big fuss. The ork boys have to stop drinking beer long e
nouhg to analyze the data being recorded by the wall of servitor skulls -- and they ain't doing that while they fight off the necrons. Etc.

Some of them require an "engeneer supporter", some of them require "presence", and some of them require a psyker to get the particular obsec.

Each army would get 2 units that could be engeneering capable. Gaurd, for example, would have servitors and engenseers. No other gaurd unit would be considered eng-sec.
Strategem. "Fake it (Engeneering)"
To "fake it" with a non-engineering unit would be a 1 cp strategem, that could only be done COMPLETELY unopposed. Meaning you can't hold an engeneer support objective if the nids are crawling all over your commisar, but if you are willing to blow command points, and you got a guy sitting all alone on an oil rig, its possible he can turn the machinery on that turn with only 1 cp spent. Of course, no army in the world can do this with TWO such sites in one turn, so you end up really not wanting to lose your servitor/engenseers. Holding an engeneering objective with an actual engeneering unit (Capable of repairing a vehicle or monster) allows you to repair one lost wound from a vehicle or monster, boardwide as a bonus to holding the primary's value. Faking it only gives you the primary's "hold 1, hold more, hold 2" victory points.

Psysec.
Some things are the warp and the warp is all. Psysec is any psyker unit. There is of course a strategem called "latent talent fake it" for psysec, which again requires no attempt by any enemy to contest. You can't have the sarge suddenly rememebr he gets wierd hunches and figure out how to pick the right crystal from the pile, while his squad is fighting off even a single grot. No non-psyker capable army is going to like this one, but there will be a unit or two in the mix that are psyker capable but not psykers.
In the imperium, its inquistion acolytes.
In the necrons, I suppose you could pick one or a few of the characters to be attuned to such phenomena even as they seek to destroy them.
In the Tau, there would be a strategem useable before the game called "special phenomenon research unit" that you could use to make someone a psyker for all psyker secured purposes.

Healer secured.
Any unit that can repair an infantry can work with healer secured. Basically, you are medically investigating something on this spot, control of which allows you to put 1 wound back on any unit that is not a vehicle in your army.
Healer faking it ... is the requisite strategem, and would allow a non-heals unit to hold this objective for primary purposes only (no free healup) and allow you to do so ONLY if UTTERLY uncontested by enemy units.

Wildcard secured.
Highest total powerlevels of all contesting units. Period. Obsec don't really apply here. These are objectives where a big ork trukk is just as good at securing it as a bunch of puny human gaurdsman would be, or where a single demonprince is all the securing the thing needs. Maybe its a baseball with a

Now, OTHER objective values.

Some objectives will have +1 to cast psyker (or +1 to deny psker) powers built into controlling them. Some will grant a command point as well as the usual victory points for primaries. Some will repair a unit on them. Some will allow a unit on them (and only on them) to get +1 saves. Basically, you can write on each objective the type it is, the power it grants (if any) and the strategem that can be used to fake it.

So you make a big pile of these subtly different objectives and flip them all upside down, such that neither you nor your opponent know before the game what they are. Most objectives are normal objectives, of course, maybe 1/2 of all them are. But the new ones are going to spice that up a bit.

Defender.
The defender gets to look at one of them and can swap it for a different one (only) before either player deploys. So if you know you are defending and you don't have any psykers, and you see your area has the "psyker only" defense, you can flip that into the area your opponent will have the worst cover for, and figure you saved a cp a round ... and that you know where his psykers are headed. You won't know what you changed it for before the game, though, but you can veto that single special objective being near your start.


I don't know if I explain this idea to death or if its any interesting, but it seems to me it could give you a rich game where people suddenly find a use for units they currently only dream of taking. Perhaps "air interdiction" is a special form of obsec, any unit that is specialized for air security (read "has a weapon that is +1 to hit flyers") obsecs that particular objective. (Or, you pay a command point to get the troops pointing all their guns skyward and be alert, each turn.)


Result is, you might find someone struggling to get their primaries very differently from how we now play it. Perhaps 1 primary in 3 would be so affected, perhaps more.

I don't know.

I was playing around these exact questions in a game last night - as we adapted the 9th edition missions for use in ProHammer.

We definitely need to clarify the following questions, ideally in a standardized way for most missions:

(1) What types of units can hold or secure objectives?

We've been playing that all units except for vehicles (maybe an exception for walkers?), swarm units (i.e. multiple "models" per base), mindless units, and those with rules saying they can't hold objectives can be used to "secure" an objective.

(2) When does a player secure an objective?

We've been playing that a check for control of objectives takes place at the start of each player's turn.

(3) How does a player hold an objective relative to an opponent countering their hold?

This is where we probably need to make some refinements. We're playing currently where all models count for purposes of "denying" an objective and preventing control, but that only certain units types (see question #1) can properly take control of an objective.

In a current game, I have a squad of 5 Grey Hunters defending an objective that's getting swarmed by about 8 scarab swarms. The Space Wolves can't secure the objective despite being the only player with models able to secure the objective, because they are outnumbered by the scarabs. But likewise the scarabs can't secure the objective, even through they outnumber, because scarabs don't have objective secured.

Seems to be a good approach for the moment. In the context of 5th/ProHammer, we need to clarify how multi-wound models and vehicles factor into this.

(4) Can units move away from objectives after they are secured and still retail "control"?

We've said that in all cases, once an objective is secured, you can move away from it and retain control. Certain mission-specific secondary objectives do require units to be at the objective in order to perform their action or whatever, but for the basic objective scoring the units could secure it and move on. Basic securing doesn't require an action.