<![CDATA[Latest posts for the thread "New Mission: Siege? "]]>

<![CDATA[Latest posts for the thread "New Mission: Siege? "]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/16.page JForum - http://www.jforum.net New Mission: Siege?
Deployment: We have decided we would like to use the hammer and anvil depolyment.

Wall: At the edge of the defenders 24" deployment zone (near the center) we want a wall that goes from one side board edge to the other. This wall we think will have 5 parts to it and each will use the rules for buildings. 2 of them will be a wall 6" high with a battlement on top and no interior capacity. 2 of them will be kinda like a bastion but with the heavy bolter and fire points on one side and an acces point in the back, with the same additional gun add ons. The last piece would be a wall with battlements on the top, but will have a big gate that can open or close when a model is in B2B with a control panel on the inside of it. These would all be armour 14 and instead of becoming impassible terrain when detroyed each would become wreckage.

Fortifications: The wall counts as a fortification which costs nothing (except the cost to add upgades guns like a quad gun) and doesn't count towards terrain density. The defender also would have unlimitted acces to fortification as long as he paid for them and they didn't go over the terrain density. The only restriction would be for every fortification the defnder has he would also have to start with a unit in, on, or with a defense line touching it.

Reserves: This would be as per the 6th edition rules with one change. The defnder doesn't count any units "Manning" a fortification as thier total to see if half of thier army can be in reserve. So lets say that the defender has 15 infantry units in his army; he has 5 manning the wall and has to deploy 5 others and can keep 5 in reserve.

Secondary objectives: All of these would be in effect.

Objectives: This is one I am not quite sure on what to do. I am thinking that blowing up a wall section should be a VP for the attacker. But am not sure what else to do here. Any suggestions? (We tried one game where we said the defender goes by Kill Points and the attacker gets a VP for each wall section destroyed and for each denial unit was in the defenders deployment zone at the end of the game)

Outflanking: We where thinking of limiting where you can come in at when you out flank, mainly to stop from lots of units outflanking behind the walls. I was thinking that on a roll of 6 to see what side you come in on you can deploy beyond the walls as the attacker, 5 or under you would have to be in front of the wall. Exception being units that fly or jump; Skimmers, jump infantry, flyers, etc.

Terrain and 1st turn: I would say that the defender sets up all the terrain and the attacker gets 1st turn with the option to sieze by the defender still available.

Should we have stratgems like in planet strike or cities of death? What about a firestorm type ability for the attacker? What else would you add to make this mission feel like you are trying to lay siege to a city or trying to defend it from attackers?]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5056301.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5056301.page GMT New Mission: Siege? http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5056874.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5056874.page GMT New Mission: Siege?

Backspacehacker wrote:
SO basically its an attack and defend sort of deal right? Defenders are dug in and attackers need to punch though right? Isn't that what planet fall is though? i mean i have never played planet fall but i have skimmed thought the rule book and it seemed like an attack defend thing sorta like this.

Not quite like planet strike. In planet strike, the attacker can pick any board edge to come in, every infantry unit can deep strike and units that can already deep strike get to assault after. There are a lot of more differences, I would say that this is closer to an Eternal War mission with some special rules. The parts that are similar are the defender setting up the terrain and the heavy influence of fortifications.

I just really like the thought of trying to break through a heavily defended city wall. I just am a little unsure on how to score objectives or victory points in the mission.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5057060.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5057060.page GMT New Mission: Siege? LOS becuase if you deployed a bastion behind the wall you wouldn't be able to have LOS over the wall.

The other thing would be maybe to give some bonuses to the attacker. Maybe for each fortification the defender takes you could get a special rule on one of your units. Examples might be: meltabombs, +1 strength to a ranged weapon or tankhunters(which wouldapply to buildings). Because the defender gets the wall at no cost the attacker could get one for free for that and more if more fortifications are added.

Any suggestions?]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5058378.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5058378.page GMT New Mission: Siege? IG, tau and shooty SM arms having a huge advantage but i guess that how it would work for defenders. also would suggest that attackers can have a larger army.

1k guard army with fortifications vs 1k of nids would be a slaughter. I would really like to play a game like this with my SM.

Get like 2 FoR 1-2 defense lines 5-6 tac squads 2 snipers, Preds or devastators and just BOOM baby]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5058653.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5058653.page GMT New Mission: Siege?

Backspacehacker wrote:
Well im always down for the idea of attack and defend games. I could see arms like IG, tau and shooty SM arms having a huge advantage but i guess that how it would work for defenders. also would suggest that attackers can have a larger army.

1k guard army with fortifications vs 1k of nids would be a slaughter. I would really like to play a game like this with my SM.

Get like 2 FoR 1-2 defense lines 5-6 tac squads 2 snipers, Preds or devastators and just BOOM baby

Ya this will be fun. I play Orks and my friend plays IG. We play quite a lot of games against each other and they are usually really good, with either player able to win. From a fluff perspective I am excited to play a game like this, the thought of trying to breach a wall into a city while the defender are trying to stop you makes for good times.

I really want to "try" and make it balanced, although sometimes with these type of mission there are armies that have a clear advantage. My thought is that I have found units inside buildings can die real easy. So by forcing the defender to have a unit man each wall section and any fortifications they have would take up a lot of points in troops and other infantry, plus the cost of any additional fortifications. The attacker really has all thier points to use to try and blow up those walls. We will have to test this out to see how it works, of course. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5058809.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5058809.page GMT New Mission: Siege?

Backspacehacker wrote:
I could see arms like IG, tau and shooty SM arms having a huge advantage but i guess that how it would work for defenders.

This is my problem with it. The side that defends is going to be at a massive advantage or disadvantage depending on the list. IG and tau will happily sit back and blow away things as usual, without having to expose troops to grab objectives.

Assault armies will have to leave the fortress or defence point which doesn't make a lot of sense. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5061124.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5061124.page GMT Re:New Mission: Siege? SM army its all good

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5061429.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5061429.page GMT New Mission: Siege? http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5063705.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5063705.page GMT New Mission: Siege? Mats are around 300 usd]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5063868.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5063868.page GMT New Mission: Siege?

Maybe make it so you have a 30" x 24" rectangle in the center of one long board edge. This gets rid of your outflanking problem, and leaves the same amount of room for the defender to deploy. Personally I'd make it so the fortress left a few inches outside of it that you could still deploy within.

For the attacker, just make it so they can't deploy with 18" of the fortress. It allows them quite a bit of space to still deploy but not completely pinning them down.

Just my quick thoughts, take them or leave them.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5067636.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5067636.page GMT New Mission: Siege?

rabid1903 wrote:
I'd change up your deployment a bit.

Maybe make it so you have a 30" x 24" rectangle in the center of one long board edge. This gets rid of your outflanking problem, and leaves the same amount of room for the defender to deploy. Personally I'd make it so the fortress left a few inches outside of it that you could still deploy within.

For the attacker, just make it so they can't deploy with 18" of the fortress. It allows them quite a bit of space to still deploy but not completely pinning them down.

Just my quick thoughts, take them or leave them.

Thanks for some input.

The new deployment idea might be interesting, it would help out with outflanking. The only thing I want is the mission to feel like you are attacking a huge city, with walls all around and your deployment makes it feel like attacking a fortress or smaller city.

The idea is for our campaign is to use this mission to break through the walls of the city, once the attacker does that than he gets a foot hold into the city and can attack other spots as needed.

I think we might play test this thing pretty soon, so I will let you knowo how it goes.

Thanks for all the input and keep it coming.
]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5068136.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5068136.page GMT New Mission: Siege?
Let me know how it goes, I'm intrigued and actually have considered setting up a campaign for quite some time.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5069731.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5069731.page GMT New Mission: Siege?

rabid1903 wrote:
Oh in that case definitely go with the whole length of the board being walled in. If you did what I was saying the city would be tiny, I was thinking of it as more of a fort instead of a city.

Let me know how it goes, I'm intrigued and actually have considered setting up a campaign for quite some time.

For sure, I will let you know how it goes.

I am still fleshing out our campaign, here are some things we will probaly use

-I have a veteran chart with USR's that units can get upgraded with
-World based campaign with each player having three worlds; Hive/command world, Forgeworld and a resource/troop training ground world. In order to attack these worlds and get a foothold on them you have to win a planetstrike game. There will probaly be about three locations to try and take over, with the main location only being able to be taken over with an Apocalypse game. The "siege mission" will probaly be used here somehow.
-There will be random deathworld where players can search for artifacts. If a player has another low point army that he is not using in the campaign I think we will say that army controls that death world, so he can play there also.
-I don't have any models for battle fleet gothic, but we might incorperate some sort of fleet rules. I did come up with a basic way to play fleet battles using cards that we may use. I am not sure if we are going to tackle this one now.
-We are starting with 10,000 points (not counting upgrades) and if units die in battle they are removed from that 10,000 list. There will be a chance to maybe make more to replace those.
-The whole thing will be based off of "Camaign Points". This is how we will determine the winner, before we start we will set a number that you have to get to to win; ex: 25. Each time you win a battle or find an artifact. you get a "CP" and there will be army tactics that are used in the campaign that you pick before we start that would also give you "CP"; like Elite Strike Force, which if you win a kill team game you get a "CP"

It seems really complicated but I am trying to make it fairly simple, so I still have some things to iron out with it. Once I get it all set I will probaly but it in the campaign section on Dakka.
]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5070625.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5070625.page GMT New Mission: Siege? http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5070656.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5070656.page GMT Re:New Mission: Siege? VP for each wall section destroyed and for each denial unit in the defender deployment zone at the end of the game. This might need a little tweaking, I thought it worked out and my friend thinks it might be a little one sided, I will explain later.

The other thing we added was that each unit on the wall was fearless and they could overwatch any unit trying to assualt the wall, I liked this idea and think it will stay.

We played 2500 points. I was the attacker playing my Orks and my friend was the defender playing Imperial Guard. My list was taylored to detroying walls and being the attacker and my friends list had some models that he was also trying out to see how they play. I think that a more taylored defender list would of made it a closer game in the end and even had an advantage to him. We can try that later.

Rough Ork List
-2 meks with KFF
----mekboy junka with deffrolla
-Biker Warboss
-Mega Warboss
-Lootas
-tank bustas
-20 Boyz
-10 Boyz
-Nob Bikers
-Mega nobs with battle wagon and deffrolla
-dakka jet
-deffkoptas
-x2 battle wagon with deff rolla
-Big Trakk
-Mobile Bunker ( special home made fortification, like a drop pod, lootas went here)

-CCS
-Lots of Platton infantry
-Forgeworld heavy mortars
-baskilisk/medusa/griffin unit
-demolisher unit with 2
-manticore
-2 bastions with guns
-home made Special fortification kinda like fortress of redemption (was aroun 170 points)
-Special Shield generator fortification.
-maybe more

So quick recap is that my Orks went fast a furious towards the walls, with 4 deffrollas and lots of nobs with power klaws I was able to take out 4 of the 5 wall sections with out to many losses. I think that he rolled bad and I would say that it would be expected that the walls will come down. I was able to out flank my Koptas and we said that because they "fly" they could outflank behind the wall, it causes some distruption. The mobile bunker also dropped in the back behind the wall but didn't do any damage and where killed real quick.

We ended up stopping about 4th turn with me having 4 points for the walls and 2 units in his deployment zone, plus linebreaker would give me 7 at that point. He had first blood and 2 KP at that point for 3 total. My warlord was exposed and I had about 4 units that where in bad shape with only maybe 1 or 2 models left. If we would of went longer I woudl think he would of had at least 3-4 more KP at the least and and warlord,I could of had maybe 1 or 2 denial units in his deployment zone. That would of ended it at maybe 7-8 or a tie.

I think his list was good in how many barrage weapons it had so that he could fire over the wall. It was pricey because of how many fortifications he had which was almost 600 points. I think the tactic for the defender would be to set up a second line inside the walls to shoot the attacker as they try and make it over the rubble into the city. With less fortifications and more of a gunline set up I think it woudl of been a very close game instead of what felt like a blow win for the attacker, even though we didn't finish the game.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5078191.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5078191.page GMT Re:New Mission: Siege? IG) as I can get my hands on. This is how I would see it happening with say, orks vs IG. The imperial guard are on the walls, pouring fire down on the relentlessly charging orks. Finally, by some valiant grot infiltration which will, needless to say be overlooked by the orks, or by, I don't know, grappling hooks or ladders as an upgrade for normal units or jump packs a unit gets over the wall. Here is where the objectives come in. There is a crackling void shield that forms a layer over the wall (excepting fire points and emplacements that would be OP) making it practically invincible. A generator lies behind the wall. Shutting it down will turn off the shield and make the walls destructable (say with AV 14). The attackers would have triple the points of the defender giving them ample points to spend on infiltrating, jump pack, or swarms of ladder wielding slugga boyz. You could also make multiple generators if there is too great of an advantage for attackers. To win the game the attackers would have to take out, say, two generators and hold the gates. Once all of these objectives are complete then the attacker wins. IDK what you would do for the defender to win. IMHO that would be a fun, cinematic game. People have been saying that armies could be made to win but it sounds like you guys are playing for fun more than to win so obviously the game should just be dramatic and fun. There would be easy ways to break these rules but if its just the two of you then you can simply agree not to make bs lists.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5079125.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5079125.page GMT New Mission: Siege?
I want to just establish a base rule set for the mission and then we can vary off of that. I think the shield generators is great idea, I just wonder how hard it is to get through or over the wall if the wall can't be destroyed until the shields are down. Maybe make the shield shield generators be the main objective, so once you get through the walls and then you have to take out the generators, we could use the mysterious objective for that also. I think changing the objective to something like this helps with the feel of the mission. My friend felt that how we played it the 1st time was a little disjointed.

I like it and will have to look into it.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
I found this picture on here of an Ork Fortress with some eldar attacking it. This looks so awesome.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/gallery/379143-Eldar%20attack%20on%20Ork%20fortress.html]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5080116.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5080116.page GMT New Mission: Siege?

Soss wrote:

I found this picture on here of an Ork Fortress with some eldar attacking it. This looks so awesome.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/gallery/379143-Eldar%20attack%20on%20Ork%20fortress.html

The tables are turned! How about this: Only one third of your army can be dedicated to infiltrating/hopping over/tunneling/any other sneaky means you can think of for getting inside those damn void shields. Some upgrades could be the, OOH OOH OOH SO HAPPY THAT I FOUND A USE FOR THIS, http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Warhammer-40000/Imperial_Guard/Death-Korps-of-Krieg/HADES-BREACHING-DRILL.html for imperial units, maybe grot dud bombs (you know, those missile with grots strapped to the top, just set not to blow), ladders, mortars, or any other feasible option for destroying the generators. Pretty much you can only have 1/3 of your army capable of destroying the generators. This could also be a great time to have some glory seeking kill team go in before the battle itself to try and destroy the generators (see 4th edition kill teams, much more cinematic). If you don't want the walls to be invincible then those generators can be secondary objectives that power a huge crackling void umbrella that the city. Even if the battle is lost, and the attackers don't gain a foot hold in the city at least they have taken out the shields until the tech priests (rowdy technique a moment) can fix it (an easy matter for one of my skill). In that time we assume that those nasty attackers have dumped as much artillery into the defenceless city as feasibly possible, making the coming city fight much, well, flatter. And less desperate population to fight back! All the special rules! But back to the walls, the main objective would be first capturing the gates, then pushing the defenders off the walls. After that the attackers push forwards, leaving some people behind to rig the walls to blow, allowing quicker deployment of troops. Another ideal opportunity for kill team as the defenders try and counter these arson obsessed orks!
]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5080446.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5080446.page GMT New Mission: Siege?

andtheyshallknownofear wrote:

Soss wrote:

I found this picture on here of an Ork Fortress with some eldar attacking it. This looks so awesome.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/gallery/379143-Eldar%20attack%20on%20Ork%20fortress.html

I like your style. I was thinking of things to add to the attacking army and ladders and the like are something I was thinking of. We are getting ready to start our campaign so I will see how this fits into it. Thanks for the input.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5080631.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5080631.page GMT New Mission: Siege? http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5080667.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5080667.page GMT New Mission: Siege?

andtheyshallknownofear wrote:
I think this style would also work well for armies that have a heavy emphasis on assault. They could keep their assualt units as mobile defence, moving to attack anyone who gets behind the walls.

Exactly, I think it makes it very cool and true to form to have some counter assault units behind the gates ready for the wave that might break through. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5085729.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5085729.page GMT New Mission: Siege? don't happen to be in washington do you?]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5087278.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/493417/5087278.page GMT