Category: Missions

ITC Missions – a post tournament Review

Before we jump into the cancon battle reports I want to run through the ITC Missions and my thoughts around them, both the good and bad.

Firstly, I will say that I much, much prefer this year’s missions than last years Maelstrom random crapola. We all now by now that I do not like random and the more random something is the worse off. While this may balance itself out over a tournament, you should not have missions swinging that wildly (it’s your own prerogative to take and accommodate units within your list like this). I will give ITC nice props then for changing this system and bringing in the primary and secondary missions.

Read more

8th Edition: Deployment and Mission Preview

We can now preview the 6 different types of Deployment and the 12 different standard missions for 8th Edition 40k.

That creates a healthy 72 different combination of mission and deployments, which should provide a lot of tactical challenges for Matched Play.

I’ve increased the size and boosted the contrast of the images, but let’s just say these spy photos are really not of a quality likely to discourage anyone from buying the real books!

(no offense meant to the many Bothans who died to bring us these plans).
Read more

New Mission: Only War

The first of the new 8th Edition missions has been released -and it contains at least one surprise: the battle lasts only five turns. Combined with what appears to be a more brutal combat and shooting phases, if 5 round missions are the new norm it would go some way towards explaining why the games are now expected to take less time.

Deployment alternates unit by unit (possibly to the advantage of armies with cheap unit ‘drops’). It is probably important to note that this mission is for armies based on Power Ratings, rather than points; for the fans of points matches, the single most important part of this entire sneak preview may in reality be the following two sentences, rather than details of the mission that was released:

“And of course, we have matched play. A lot of these missions will be familiar to players today. You still have your six Eternal War and six Maelstrom of War missions, but with a few tweaks since their last outing. One big change is we now have six deployment maps, rather than the three of today. “ Read more

Mission Testing – 7th edition

Alrighty then, I’m adding the concept of Maelstrom missions onto the 3++con missions (seen here) with some changes and I’d like you lot to help out with playtesting. Post results here obviously and once this moves off front page we’ll move to forums.

We’re doing a one dayer in July and I want to get these polished off for then. 4 missions taken straight from 3++con with added Maelstrom. Here are the Maelstrom rules we’re using:

  1. Each player draws up to three Maelstrom missions each controlling turn; up to three (opponents can see these cards)
  2. Upon drawing a card, any player may discard up to any number of their cards and re-draw once per turn
  3. Any cards that are not achievable may be discarded and re-drawn for free
  4. All references to D3 Vp are replaced with “two VP”
  5. Upon completing the Maelstrom requirements, place this in an “achieved” pile and calculate VP at end of the game
  6. If a game has a limited amount of objectives, Randomly assign Maelstrom objective numbers and automatically discard any objective cards greater than the set number (i.e. if four objectives are used; randomly assign 1,2,3,4 and discard any cards with references to objectives 5,6)

Read more

Maelstrom Missions – A Thought Process


I’ll be really quick here – as is, I hate Maelstrom missions.

However, I love their concept (mid-game scoring) – I just feel their implementation was terrible.

We’ve discussed randomness before; there’s good random and there’s bad random. Maelstrom has both types – good random in that you need to be fluid on the tabletop; you need to have an army that can adapt and change because if you don’t, you generally get punished by your opponent. Having missions that are scored in-game amplify this – many people whine and moan about your static gunlines when they are generally bad lists – they just aren’t forcing them to move and thus they get shot off the board. Whine less.

Read more

Eternal War vs. Maelstrom – What’s the Difference?

You sit down to play a board game – everything is set up, someone is belching rules at you about how to move your game piece from one point to another, and you stare at the gigantic pile of game tokens (of which there are a thousand, because you’re playing a Fantasy Flight game). Suddenly, your ears perk up, because the resident instructor says…

This is how you win the game –

The latest edition of Warhammer 40k has provided us with one generic win condition – victory points – and two very different methods of determining how those points are obtained – Eternal War and Maelstrom missions. Since we’re all new to 7th Edition, it’s important to take a look at the differences between these two mission types and identify how they affect army builds/strategy.

Read more

Asymmetrical Tournament Test Mission #1 Critique

Asymmetry-ComparissionRecently, MVB over at Whiskey & 40k (and TO of the NOVA tournaments) has put up his first beta test mission. For those of you who aren’t up to speed, there’s currently a debate going on about how to adjust 40k to be a more fun and competitive game. MVB and others have proposed that the game be adjusted in its end-state, instead of before play, and that perhaps creating a better game can come solely from creating better missions.

I think it’s worth reading his original post on the subject, which I found quite thought provoking. It also gives as its example what is basically the following mission that we’re going to take a look at.

Read more

Emperor’s Will – a Simple Change?

The 3++ missions have been used in quite a few differing forms across Australian tournaments now which is great but I haven’t really touched them in terms of getting some new ideas worked in there or different combinations but with a new tournament season just around the corner, I wanted to get some more ideas.

So first one – Emperor’s Will. Emps Will is you each place one objective in your own DZ and go from there. Secondary objectives were part of the introduction by Games Workshop to (finally) reduce draws but this is still one of the most boring and draw friendly missions out there. Part of this is because a lot of people play like little babies and castle up and that’s generally bad play dependant upon the terrain and opposing army but even good players do this and it leads to really boring games or games decided by who gets First Blood and then because both players were crying in corners, one tries to go all out and either dominates or gets dominated. Boring, yes?

So a simple way to change this without sitting down and explaining nicely to everyone how they are playing the game wrong (read 3++; I hear it’s great!) – you place your opponent’s objective in their deployment zone.

Read more

Feast Battle Pack 5/10 Now Available- Grinder

GrinderCoverThe next battle pack has arrived- the continuation of the story of Iridus, as well as three more missions.

Take a look here! (Google docs)

If you missed the previous battle packs, you can find them here:

Skirmish (direct link)

Tip of the Spear (direct link)

Assault (Direct Link)

Warzone (Direct Link)

Like this last pack, this is a complete rules set for running an event. Just print out a copy for each player and you’re ready to play.