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.

Readin some of the stuff on apoc data sheets and other things of the sort; and thinkin up fluff for my SM chapter I wondered what others came up with for scenario ideas. So, share the love: ideas for 3-way fights, allies with different objectives, handicap style, stuff that just worked well for you?

So heres my idea

Assult on a SM Fortress monastary.
on one side you have a SM player with a fortress monastary and defenses (duh!!)
on the other side, 1+ enemies


If you looked at the pic you will get what I am explaining alot better

There will be 3 trench lines, and the fortress monastary flanked by 2 cliffs (impassable save for skimmers and jump infantry)

the SM player may deploy anywhere within this zone, and may deploy heavy artillery type vehicles, jump infantry or skimmers here.

the other players deploy in the area starting about 12 inches from the first SM trench.

The first trench gives a 4+ cover save. the three bulbs are heavy weapons jets, each having a turret consisting of an hb hf combo. 1 per buble, each is treated like an opentopped immoble vehicle. It can be captured and turned around if A) gunner is killed. or B) a unit reaches it in assult, it then rolls a d6, on 4+ it captures gun in question, and is removed from its squad. These turrets can be fully rotated and only manned by servitors, elites, or units with a heavy weapon.

In between the first and secon trench (space of 15 inches) are 2 towers (black dots in my pic) with twinlinked heavy bolter turrets (on top). these can be captured or destroyed (AV 12(?) from all sides space and firing slots for 1/2 a squad). Captured by 1 squad reaching it in assult, CC rounds will comence until one squad is wiped out, winning squad will controll tower. (turret is considered to be operated by a machine spirit which, if the tower is captured can be "corrupted" (reprogrammed) on a d6 roll of 4+(?) the towers areequidistant from each other, the canyon walls and trenches immideately in front of and behind them

Second trench gives a 3+ cover save and has two bunkers in it (black boxes on my pic) same as towers accept AV 14(?) and have two interrior servitor ran heavy bolters (captured w/bunker, moveable) space for 1 full squad, has a top mounted machine spirit operated twinlinked heavybolter w/rocket launcher on top (reprogrammed like turret guns)

Between trenches 2 and 3 are 3 more turrets, positioined the same, statistically the same accept top turret is assult cannon with las cannon underneath (both fire 24 in)

3rd trench is the same accept has 3 bunkers, whose interrior turrets are twin linked and top mounted (machine spirit powered) turret is twin linked assult cannons with over-under, twin linked las cannons (all 4 guns fire 24 inches) Placed 15 inches from second trench.

30 in. from last trench is the Fortress Monastary. The Fortress monastary has lots of heavy guns (all flavors) and bunker blisters (third trench variety) as destroyable hard-points. It has a re-deployment center that can fire drop pods (loaded with any compatible units) or teleport any compatible units to anywhere behind the first trench (once per game for any unit, up to 4 times per turn total) on the inside would be a massive generator of some sort, the attackers ultimate goal is to bring a bomb to this poin, the defenders to stop this from happening befor the game ends. Acts as a command vehicle.

Victory points to attacker for destroying/capturing hw emplacements/bunkers/towers, and controlling each trench and the spaces in between (one large score for the capture). Defender gets points for each turn in possesion of the same points, fewer points per turn, but if the game goes its full length (because of distances it would have to be more than 6 turns) the points would be equal to or slightly greater than pts awarded for capture/destroy (capture towers and bunkers worth more than destroy)

Attackers can re-deploy any non-special character non-massive units killed at the 1/4, 1/2 and 3/4 marks of the game to represent additional waves attacking.

This in no way has to have the defenders being SM, they were just a convenient example of defenders I knew well.
I didnt give victory point values because I dont have an apocolypse size army as of yet so I cant be sure what is fair
And yes, unless a massive flaw is pointed out, once I have an appocolypse sized army I will make this terrain/scenario


Your thoughts?
Any other cool ideas?

yeah...
I realise that assulting a Spaz marine fortresz fluff wise should be difficult...
but it looks like your saying the marines get guns and artillery and drop pods and cover saves and.........
Geographically your channeling the SMs enemy... this will remove any benifits that a horde could gain from the assult...
Why would anyone want to play against this...

Panic
yeah....

Well, the attackers could be given a points advantage (without the strategem bonus the SMs would normally get). Also, there are plenty of ways in Apoc to get stuck in without slogging through all those fortifications. It may take some balancing, but I don't see why it can't be done.

One way to do it would be to give the enemy "without number" on all their units, but set a turn limit for the game while giving victory points for various locations in the fortress.

Alternately, for straight up attacker vs. defender games, in many war games the points ratio is traditionally 1.5 Attacker for 1.0 Defender. In this situation, I might go so far as to say 1.75 points for the attackers for every 1.0 on the defender, just because of the strength of the position.
Now, if the defender does not have enough troops to really defend in depth, 1.5 might be more useful, since a lot of the benefit to being dug in is lost.

all that said, I guess you could change the cliff face to only 6 inches so instead of being impassable, it is merely really time consuming to get up there to get at the heavy sh!t. Guess you could also change the re-deploy center to a deep-strike co-ordinator type deal (dont roll a scatter die for deep striking, you get to call the spot and thats where the troops go). Probably right about the cover saves for the trenches being to much, nerf.

getting around the defenses wouldnt be too hard for some armies (think WWP capturing some of the heavy emplacements and using them on the defenders (that was kinda the point of mentioning you could capture them))

Panic, you asked why anyone would want to play against this, well theres probably at least one player in every group of 40K gamers who would freaking love to be able to say "yea, I just took out a fortress monastary bitch, your space marines are PANSIES".

thx for the feedback tho

I like the concept. That being said, instead of making the attackers go lengthwise from table end to table end, put the fortress in a corner of the table instead of along a short edge. This would 1) give the attackers more room to deploy 2) make the cliffs running away from the fortress a more or less V shape instead of the oiminous channel of death your sketch shows, and 3) allow the attacker (and defender, actually) to make flank runs down the wider side and open up other tactical options that the channel of death dont allow...

channel of death.....


I like that one!

I'll make up a revised version of that sketch per DeathGod's suggestion an post it sometie in the near future then, seems like a good idea