Switch Theme:

OBSEC  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut





not a discussion about the rule itself, but about people's interpretation of securing an objective.

this is a discussion i've in the community at large before, figured i'd bring it up here.

some interpret OBSEC as something that should be on elites, moving forward, securing an objective, etc. while some say that regular soldiers are the ones who actually secure an objective by actually holding the objective once the elite forces have moved on, etc.


here's a joke, that i find hits on this differing idea of what it might mean to secure an objective, and personally why i think the whole OBSEC rule as it is now is kinda silly.


https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/81n73v/the_differences_between_the_branches_of_the_us/

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/02/23 17:11:04


 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka




NE Ohio, USA

It's been a pretty rare game for me where a unit having OBSEC was important concerning objectives.
Where it's proven slightly more important is for doing actions/secondaries/agendas & not having them fail if you shoot.
   
Made in us
The Marine Standing Behind Marneus Calgar





Upstate, New York

ObSec is a way to incentivize taking basic troop pics.

In prior editions only troops could score. Did sternguard forget how to secure a site when they earned their terminator honors? Didn’t make much sense. But troop pics make up the thematic core of an army. GW wants them in lists and on the table. The way points work and how the game rewards specialization, without some carrot people would not take any troops. Or just bare-bones pics to fill mandetory slots. Obsec gave troops that edge.

   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





The meta answer is that obsec is a bonus they gave to troops because many armies (especially at the time obsec was introduced) had troops that were basically designed to be cost-inefficient "tax" units that you only took because you had to. As the game started moving away from making troops mandatory, obsec was introduced to incentivize taking what were often a worse version of a non-troop unit in your book.



ATTENTION
. Psychic tests are unfluffy. Your longing for AV is understandable but misguided. Your chapter doesn't need a separate codex. Doctrines should go away. Being a "troop" means nothing. This has been a cranky service announcement. You may now resume your regularly scheduled arguing.
 
   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut





honestly by most any definition of securing an objective you troops are not required to babysit it the entire time, so i kinda hope the marine sticky objective rule spreads to a general rule in 10th
   
Made in us
Nasty Nob




Crescent City Fl..

ccs wrote:
It's been a pretty rare game for me where a unit having OBSEC was important concerning objectives.
Where it's proven slightly more important is for doing actions/secondaries/agendas & not having them fail if you shoot.

My grots enjoyed it for quite a while back in 7th and whenever troops had it by default. Always fun to frustrate the other players plans and make them work harder for an objective. No idea how it works in 9th, I can't remember my last game of 9th.

The rewards of tolerance are treachery and betrayal.

Remember kids, Games Workshop needs you more than you need them.  
   
Made in us
Ancient Ultramarine Venerable Dreadnought





johnpjones1775 wrote:
not a discussion about the rule itself, but about people's interpretation of securing an objective.

this is a discussion i've in the community at large before, figured i'd bring it up here.

some interpret OBSEC as something that should be on elites, moving forward, securing an objective, etc. while some say that regular soldiers are the ones who actually secure an objective by actually holding the objective once the elite forces have moved on, etc.


here's a joke, that i find hits on this differing idea of what it might mean to secure an objective, and personally why i think the whole OBSEC rule as it is now is kinda silly.


https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/81n73v/the_differences_between_the_branches_of_the_us/


ObSec shouldn't be based on Datasheet Section/Battlefield Role. It would be better to make it based on Keywords (Probably Infantry/Walkers/Monsters) with a few bespoke exceptions here and there (Not actual suggestions just thematic example/fluff of what COULD be: Grots are too cowardly/lazy and don't ObSec without an Ork/Runtherd. Servitors don't get ObSec without a Techpriest/Techmarine/etc. Instinctual Behavior requires in-range Synapse. And many of the ones that don't get it should get a different Objective Based rule that interacts/interrupts ObSec.

Something similar should be done with actions: Actions should be based on Keywords - (this would require adding keywords to non-SM based on my example categories) Actions for CHARACTER, MONSTER/WALKER, LEADER (think Sergeant, etc and each faction should probably getting a freebie one in their min squad size), or SQUAD (which is given to an Infantry Unit of more than X starting size - this makes it so a Tac Squad (INFANTRY + SQUAD) can perform an action you don't want an Apothecary (INFANTRY but NOT SQUAD), VEHICLE, CORE, what have you - to do. Mix and Match those enough, with a limited ability to recycle one or two Keywords only, and people are incentivized to still have diverse armies.

Obviously this would need to be playtested for balance, we'd have to add a few more keywords Like SQUAD, and NOT-CORE but that's the beauty of keywords, they can be very powerful if GW would use them right.

So you might have:
At the start of the game, you roll up what each "objective" is with a story based name(this is shared: Both sides know its a Dataport, and it's a Dataport for both sides. Each side Generates their Action in private before the game. So you know what you need to do where AFTER you've made your list but BEFORE you start deploying.

Objective: Dataport Terminal

Then roll a D6 for the Action:

1) Hack some Data with a CHARACTER
2) Guard the Access Point of the Dataport with a SQUAD
3) Use your LEADER to corrupt the Dataport.
4) Camoflage/Osbscure the Dataport with a WALKER/MONSTER
5) Bring New Data to the Dataport with a BIKER or FLY
6) Drop Off Repair Parts from your TRANSPORT/INFANTRY.
7) Prepare to tow the Dataport Console with your VEHICLE

Roll 1 D6, pick up or down and count up/down skipping up to 1 choice until you get your Action for this Objective. This way you can't pick objective/Actions ahead of time tailoring your list to your "chores", and you're encouraged to take a diverse army, AND no two games would play the same because you have different Actions/Objectives.

My WHFB armies were Bretonians and Tomb Kings. 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: