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.

My friend and I are going to start a new campaign, in this campaign we are adding some new fortifications. I was wondering what you thought on there rules and point values. These are still new and in the rough stage.

Mobile Bunker. 50 points
-Small Building with armor 12 (was14) on all sides.
-2 fire points on each side and one access point.
-can be deployed normally or can deepstrike. If deep strikes than a unit can deploy inside of it and it has the internal guidance rule like a drop pod (not the drop pod assault rule).

Shield Generator Staion. 75 points
-Small building with armor 12 (was14) on all sides.
-No fire points and one access point.
-When occupied by your unit every unit and building/fortification (Friend or Foe) within 6" gets a 5+ invunerable save, against shooting only.
-10 points and you can have a pintle mounted heavy stubber as a gun emplacement. (this was going to be a storm bolter)
-Can take the comms relay for 20 points. Unit inside would count towards being able to use this feature.

What do you think? Do you have any ideas on other fortifications?

Soss wrote:
Mobile Bunker. 50 points
-Small Building with armor 14 on all sides.
-2 fire points on each side and one access point.
-can be deployed normally or can deepstrike. If deep strikes than a unit can deploy inside of it and it has the internal guidance rule like a drop pod.

Considering that a normal Bastion is 50% more expensive than this I'd say that this is undercosted. At least double it's points cost. What size are you thinking it should be?

Soss wrote:
Shield generator Staion. 75 points
-Small building with armor 14 on all sides.
-no fire points and one access point.
-when occupied every unit and building/fortification within 6" gets a 5+ cover save.
-can take an automated pintle mounted storm bolter for 10 points.
-can take the comms relay for 20 points. Unit inside would count towards being able to use this feature.

Weapons are fine, however the potential for castling around this is horrendous, which is also going to stop meltaguns from getting close and causing an enormous explosion. Definately needs a points increase. I'd probably say double this too, 125pts minimum.

Edited for strange merger of sentences.

I want to see xenos 'fortifications'.

Like, the old Hormagaunt brood nest. Make it something like 12/12/12, since it's small, it's easy to hide. Maybe 100pts.

Requires a Hormagaunt brood to be taken as a troops choice. Added as an upgrade to said Hormagaunt brood as well as taking a Fortification slot.

Whenever the Hormagaunt brood is destroyed, it will redeploy as if deep striking on the location of the brood nest, but can assault or run that turn.

If the unit is below 25% strength but not destroyed, it can be redeployed in this manner, but loses D6 models.

If the brood nest is destroyed, the Hormagaunt brood may no longer redeploy.

The bunker is better than a Bastion and costs less points?

yes . its is good.

I agree with Rampage here. These definately need to be more expensive. I like them, but they're way to cheap.

I've always thought it would be a cool idea to have a manner of integrating defensive lines. By that I mean, paying the points for bastions, trenches, aiegis lines, etc. and then paying extra to integrate them for a bonus, like an apocalypse data sheet. . . If I could spitball for a minute. . .

Trench System - 200pts
Minimum 16" of fortification (any fortification 4+ cover save or better).
All units within the trench system recive 3+ cover save.
All normal bonuses provided by fortifications within the system apply.

Special Rule: Sectors of Fire: Any enemy unit being fired on from the Trench System by at least 2 units must take a leadership test at -D3 normal leadership value.

You could use that to integrate any bunkers you may have. The poblem is it chews up points really quickly.

EDIT: Is this turning into a proposed rule thread? Haha!

The difference between the Mobile Bunker and a Bastion is the bunker can only hold 10 models, has no emplaced weapons, no battlement and doesn't have the ability to attached a comm relay or an interceptor weapon. That is why I came up with the lower price. The deepstriking ability could be huge and that might justify it being the same cost as a bastion, still not sure though.

The Shield generator station does have the cocern of castling around it, but with just a 5+ cover it doesn't make it that good. The cost was similair to the landing platform fortification which gives you a 4++ and you could fit almost as many models on that as you could around the station. This is a small building so whould not have a big foot print. The other thing is that it only works while having a unit inside it, so that is an added cost to it. The main reason I wanted to make something like this is for planet strike games to protect a little against the firestorm.

If you want to put this in detail it should go in Proposed Rules, so I will move it there.

Soss wrote:
The difference between the Mobile Bunker and a Bastion is the bunker can only hold 10 models, has no emplaced weapons, no battlement and doesn't have the ability to attached a comm relay or an interceptor weapon. That is why I came up with the lower price. The deepstriking ability could be huge and that might justify it being the same cost as a bastion, still not sure though.

The Shield generator station does have the cocern of castling around it, but with just a 5+ cover it doesn't make it that good. The cost was similair to the landing platform fortification which gives you a 4++ and you could fit almost as many models on that as you could around the station. This is a small building so whould not have a big foot print. The other thing is that it only works while having a unit inside it, so that is an added cost to it. The main reason I wanted to make something like this is for planet strike games to protect a little against the firestorm.

I can see where you're coming from with the shield generator, it makes a bit more sense now. However, I think the deepstrike on the bunker is an incredibly powerful tool. Consider if you were to dump it on the field with some devastators, or a Guard heavy weapons squad. That's an instant killzone that the enemy has to negotiate or avoid. . . for only 50 points. I dunno man, I feel like both of them should be at least 100 points a pop.

Grammar Error Edit

Soss wrote:
The difference between the Mobile Bunker and a Bastion is the bunker can only hold 10 models, has no emplaced weapons, no battlement and doesn't have the ability to attached a comm relay or an interceptor weapon. That is why I came up with the lower price. The deepstriking ability could be huge and that might justify it being the same cost as a bastion, still not sure though.

You don't buy a bastion for the emplaced weapons, you buy it for the protection, and allowing that protection to deep strike is incredibly powerful. I'm going to deep strike my bunker next to your home objective and on turn 5 I'm going to jump out and contest it, because you can't get me inside my bunker.

Soss wrote:
The Shield generator station does have the cocern of castling around it, but with just a 5+ cover it doesn't make it that good. The cost was similair to the landing platform fortification which gives you a 4++ and you could fit almost as many models on that as you could around the station. This is a small building so whould not have a big foot print. The other thing is that it only works while having a unit inside it, so that is an added cost to it. The main reason I wanted to make something like this is for planet strike games to protect a little against the firestorm.

It does, here's another example. I'm playing Necrons, I take imotekh, suddenly, so long as you wish to stay out of range of all of the firearms that I've got castled around the shield generator then you are allowing me to keep a 3+ cover save, going to a 2+ with going to ground. You aren't going to shift that. Now lets say I have Orks, and I have a squad on an objective behind the generator. You are effectively doubling the durability as mathematically a 5+ save is twice as likely to be passed as a 6+, this is even before considering that the vast majority of the game's ranged weapons ignore 6+ armour. A 5+ cover save is always awesome. A Big Mek with a KFF is considered a bargain, this is the same, except it is 10pts cheaper and a crap load more durable and can hold a unit.

Rampage, Do you have any sugestions on what would make these more balanced?

On the Mobile Bunker there are a couple things to be pointed out. The bunker would come in on the 4th turn and still would scatter. So being close to an objective would require a good placement and for the objective to not be surrounded by your own troops. The turn it arrives the unit inside could only snapfire out of it. With fire points and only a 10 model capacity it would be vunerable to assaults with flamers and grenades. I have found that models inside take a pretty good beating when the building is attacked.

The shield generator point is a good one. I was thinking that a cover save would be better than a invunarable save. Maybe if I make that a 5++ save instead of a cover save it would eliminate the stealth and shrouding. The 5++ woul donly be good against shooting so assaults would still work. You are right about the cost factor but I still think that having to have a unit inside it makes the cost have an added "hidden" cost added to it. I am not to worried about castleing around it because on how many models you could get around it. Plus a Aegis Defense line which is cheaper has a better save and can cover so much more area.

I think that the rules are fine, I just think that they need bumping up in points. Of course this will probably make them not worth it for some armies but the alternative is making them hideously dirty for others. I think the Invuln save is a good idea.

I'm not a fan of the bunker coming in turn 4 though, less time to blow it up. How about it can only deep strike within a certain distance of one of your units? Not really with the Aegis defence line, as the bunker is already 6"x6" it'll effectively be projecting a 12" by 12" area of durability.

The bunker woudld come in on turn 4 only because of the reserve rules, which all units in reserve automatically come in on turn 4.

What if I was to make the armour values 12 instead of 14, would that balance them out better at thier current price?

Ok, but you're still rolling for it to come on on turns 2 and 3 as normal?

As for the last part. Yes, I definately think that that would be a good decision, and I think that the points would be fair for it should it be Av12. What size are you planning on making it? The same as a standard bastion?

I am using electical outlet boxes from the hardware store as the bunker and shield generator. The Bunker is about 5x5 and the shield is about 3x5, roughly.

Wow. That looks absolutely fantastic. That's really cool. And the size is fine, I think it's just right now.

 Rampage wrote:
Wow. That looks absolutely fantastic. That's really cool. And the size is fine, I think it's just right now.

Thank you. My friend has a really cool Imperial Guard one also. We are starting a campaign, my Orks vs. his IG. These are going to be special fortifications for the campaign. I will let you know how they turn out.

Here is a Tyranid one I came up with.


Brood Nest: 50 pts

A brood nest is a Medium Building with AV12. It has no transport capacity or access points.

Special Rules: Spawnings,

Spawnings: At the beginning of the owner's movement phase, the Brood Nest spawns 2D6 Termigants. These Termigants must be placed wholly within 6" of the Brood Nest and form a single unit. These Termigants may not move the turn they are spawned, although they may shoot and assault as normal.

Options:

The Brood Nest may spawn Hormagaunts instead of Termigants for 20 pts

The Brood Nest may spawn Rippers instead of Termigants for -10 pts. If this is done the nest spawns 2D6+2 Ripper Swarms instead of 2D6.

The Brood Nest can purchase any two of the following,

Toxin Sacs: 30 pts (models spawned by a Brood Nest with Toxin Sacs have the poison 4+ special rule on all their melee weapons)
Adrenal Glands: 30 pts (models spawned by a Brood Nest with Adrenal Glands have the Furious Charge special rule)
Hardened Chiten Glands: 40 pts (models spawned by a Brood Nest with Hardened Chiten glands have their armor save increased by 1, to a maximum of 3+)
Synapse Node: 10 pts (a Brood Nest with a Synapse Node is a Synapse Creature and also has the Shadow in the Warp special rule)
Biomorph Node: variable points*

*A Biomorph Node gives the Brood Nest a weapon from the following list, that may be fired in the shooting phase at a BS of 2.

Fleshborer Hive: 15 pts
Twin-linked Heavy Venom Cannon: 30 pts
Twin-linked Impaler Cannon: 30 pts
Twin-linked Impaler Cannon with the Skyfire special rule: 40 pts

The only thing that concerns me about the Brood Nest would be that it is spawning troop choices. In a game that is mostly objectives it might be a little strong.

Maybe changing it to gargoyles or another non troop unit would work, or lower the armor value. Another thought might be to spawn the models in the brood nest during the shooting phase, so that troop choices dont come out last turn to claim something. It would give the opponent a chance to react to it if needed.

I do think that it would be way cool looking and a good concept.

They can't move the turn they are spawned, only run if they want to. So no last turn objective grabbing unless the objective is right next to the nest.

Cool nest idea.. I'll have to direct my cousin to this forum.

He's getting back into nids

I'm trying to think of a good way to implement a Webway Gate for Eldar, but all I can come up with is like a DE Webway Portal with no restrictions on what comes through it. I can't see that ever being something anyone would take though, since most of the competetive Eldar units these days either want to stand back and shoot, or don't really have any trouble getting where they need to do. Any ideas?

Hey, I just made a thread for new Chaos Specific fortifications that no-one has looked at. Seeing as this is about forts, I'll just link here.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/482398.page

Please have a look and tell me what you think!

 MandalorynOranj wrote:
I'm trying to think of a good way to implement a Webway Gate for Eldar, but all I can come up with is like a DE Webway Portal with no restrictions on what comes through it. I can't see that ever being something anyone would take though, since most of the competetive Eldar units these days either want to stand back and shoot, or don't really have any trouble getting where they need to do. Any ideas?

I made this up a few months ago too.


Webway Gate: 200 pts

The Webway Gate is a fortification choice for an Eldar or Dark Eldar army.

A Webway Gate is an AV13 small building with no transport capacity or access points.

Special Rules:

Webway Portal: Any non-deepstriking Eldar or Dark Eldar unit that arrives from reserves, instead of arriving from a board edge as normal, may choose to instead arrive through the Webway Gate. Treat the Webway Gate as if it was a board edge for all purposes. Also, Eldar and Dark Eldar units that are falling back will fall back towards the Webway gate rather then the normal board edge. Treat the Gate is if it was the board edge they are falling back to, if their fall back move brings them into contact with the Webway Gate treat it as if they had fallen back off the board edge.

Reinforcements: The Webway portal is not only a line of retreat and safety for the Eldar, it is also a method of reinforcing their battleline. At the beginning of each friendly movement phase, you may replenish D6+2 troop models, up to the units starting model count, in any Eldar/Dark Eldar troops unit that has at least one member within 6" of the Webway Gate. The reinforcement models must be placed wholly within 6" of the Webway Gate. These replacement models may not move the turn they are placed, but they may shoot and assault as normal. This special rule may not be used to replace Characters or special weapon upgrades.

@Grey Templar: That sounds awesome! I probably wouldn't personally use it since all it would do for me is replace a Ranger or two a turn.

Really fluffy though, and definitely serves a unique purpose.

So we played a game last night where each of us got a mobile bunker to us in the game and try out the rules. We didn't use points for them just for this game since we both got one to try out.

I put 8 lootas in mine and my friend put a special weapon squad with plasma and a pirmas phyker in his. Both deep striked in. I feel that they where good enough for the point value. The buildings them selves did not get wrecked but both units got destroyed due to units assaulting the bunker. They both where able to do some damage before they got wiped out. We both thought the rules were very good for them.

Next we will try out the shield generator. I got a electrical box from the hardwares store to make one.

Soss wrote:
So we played a game last night where each of us got a mobile bunker to us in the game and try out the rules. We didn't use points for them just for this game since we both got one to try out.

I put 8 lootas in mine and my friend put a special weapon squad with plasma and a pirmas phyker in his. Both deep striked in. I feel that they where good enough for the point value. The buildings them selves did not get wrecked but both units got destroyed due to units assaulting the bunker. They both where able to do some damage before they got wiped out. We both thought the rules were very good for them.

Next we will try out the shield generator. I got a electrical box from the hardwares store to make one.

Since you both had one (and you didn't assign a points value to it), I think its a little unfair to say that are 'good' enough' for the point value.

To properly test one of you need to use it and the other not. Or both have one, but at different point values.

FenixZero wrote:

Soss wrote:
So we played a game last night where each of us got a mobile bunker to us in the game and try out the rules. We didn't use points for them just for this game since we both got one to try out.

I put 8 lootas in mine and my friend put a special weapon squad with plasma and a pirmas phyker in his. Both deep striked in. I feel that they where good enough for the point value. The buildings them selves did not get wrecked but both units got destroyed due to units assaulting the bunker. They both where able to do some damage before they got wiped out. We both thought the rules were very good for them.

Next we will try out the shield generator. I got a electrical box from the hardwares store to make one.

Since you both had one (and you didn't assign a points value to it), I think its a little unfair to say that are 'good' enough' for the point value.

To properly test one of you need to use it and the other not. Or both have one, but at different point values.

My main thing was to test the power of it, not really the point value. I think the point value for it will be just fine. I thought we both felt that it was something we would use in the future and it wasn't an auto include, so it seems just right as far as rule wise.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grey Templar wrote:

 MandalorynOranj wrote:
I'm trying to think of a good way to implement a Webway Gate for Eldar, but all I can come up with is like a DE Webway Portal with no restrictions on what comes through it. I can't see that ever being something anyone would take though, since most of the competetive Eldar units these days either want to stand back and shoot, or don't really have any trouble getting where they need to do. Any ideas?

I made this up a few months ago too.


Webway Gate: 200 pts

The Webway Gate is a fortification choice for an Eldar or Dark Eldar army.

A Webway Gate is an AV13 small building with no transport capacity or access points.

Special Rules:

Webway Portal: Any non-deepstriking Eldar or Dark Eldar unit that arrives from reserves, instead of arriving from a board edge as normal, may choose to instead arrive through the Webway Gate. Treat the Webway Gate as if it was a board edge for all purposes. Also, Eldar and Dark Eldar units that are falling back will fall back towards the Webway gate rather then the normal board edge. Treat the Gate is if it was the board edge they are falling back to, if their fall back move brings them into contact with the Webway Gate treat it as if they had fallen back off the board edge.

Reinforcements: The Webway portal is not only a line of retreat and safety for the Eldar, it is also a method of reinforcing their battleline. At the beginning of each friendly movement phase, you may replenish D6+2 troop models, up to the units starting model count, in any Eldar/Dark Eldar troops unit that has at least one member within 6" of the Webway Gate. The reinforcement models must be placed wholly within 6" of the Webway Gate. These replacement models may not move the turn they are placed, but they may shoot and assault as normal. This special rule may not be used to replace Characters or special weapon upgrades.

I really like this and think it fits with the fluff so well. The only thing I think about is it being a building, most of the building are actually hard to destroy but the damage results kill the models inside very easy. What if it was treatted as an immobilised vehicle that had an armour value and some hull points to it? I love the reinforcement idea also, I think it should be limited to replacing models from one unit a turn. The point value could maybe be a little less too, 200 seems really high.

Have you tried this out in a game? I wonder how it preformed.

I played a planet strike game and we got to try out some of my fortifications. My friend whcih plays IG used a shield generator, with a bastion and a Aigis Defense line with quad gun as the objectives. He was able to have some tanks, an artillary unit and a bastion within the 6" for the shield rule. It was good for the fact that you feel a little more protected against firestorms and it lets the defender deploy more units from the start. I avoided those units for the firestorm and targeted others that didn't have the save. When we got into the game turns I founfd the 5++ save less usefull because of terrain that gave a 4+ cover save. Once I was able to assualt the shield generator it went down. I think it has good potential. We will have to test it out in a normal game.

I tried out the mobile bunker for my attacking force and once again we both felt the rules are solid and the point value is fair. I had soem lootas in mine.