Hey all - ive been thinking about this for a little while, and i thought it was time i posted a thread about it.

the CP rules havent been included in the new rulebook, the ones on the UK site are out of date (even compared to the 4th ed version) and they are missing altogether from the new-look US site (from what i could tell). as a result, the most current rules for CP are in the 4th ed hardback rulebook (p182-183).

the CP restrictions themselves dont seem to suffer any compatability issues with the transition to 5th edition (so could be used just as easily under the new rules), however, the CP Mission is looking decidedly dated now that the scenarios in the rulebook have been updated.

i was hoping we could come up with some ways to bring the mission(s) used in 5th ed CP games up to date. would using the normal 40K missions (but with CP restrictions on the forces used) work? or would they be unbalanced for such small and varied forces - for example, having more objective counters than you have units in your army, or having 2-3 x as many KP to give away as your opponent?

i like the sound of the way you decide who deploys first and gets the first turn, and how you deploy your whole force at once, and the idea of being able to "seize the iniative". i think that shaking things up with random deployment zones and more special rules as standard (Deepstrike, Reserves etc) will be good too.

so, what do you think? when you play 5th ed CP games, will you want to use the 4th ed Mission, all the 5th ed rules, or something in between?

while i am mainly asking this Re: the big meetup next month (where i hope to have some intro games using my Plague Zombies), this thread is open to everyone, not just those attending.

cheers in advance!

~ Tim
p.s. and no, dropping CP altogether to play "proper games" isnt an option.

CP selection rules as in 4th ed BGB
Games either 400 or 500 points
4x4 table
25% terrain as per normal recommendation
5 ed missions and set-up straight out the rule book.
5-7 turns as per 5th ed.

Worked for us last night using 500 point forces to learn the rules.

Combat patrol was always intended as a quick game ill personnel be keeping the 4th Ed restrictions on army construcion but probably be playing the Annihilation Mission with a roll of between Pitched Battle and Spearhead set-ups.

In my opinion this is the closest way of keeping to the original pick up feel of the rules with the minimum of fuss. The reason i picked annihilation is because its straight forward and with a minimum of one troop choice most people wont have enough stuff to claim objectives and seems wrong for such a small game to enforce that.

that's why going up to 500 points is good as people can take the extra scoring units

Ive always found that at 500p that you may as well just play a normal game with the FOC although using some of the CP restrictions is a good idea.
400p just seems more patrol like having to have a bunch of troops takes some of the skirmish element of a combat patrol game away as they start to feel more like armies.

using the normal FOC at 500 points can still stuff armies like necrons though. At least keeping the CP restrictions gives them more options.

mattjgilbert wrote:using the normal FOC at 500 points can still stuff armies like necrons though. At least keeping the CP restrictions gives them more options.

You could agree on the points limit (400 points for a quicker game maybe), use the army limitations for CP from 4th edition, (HQ optional) but to mix it up, try using the battle missions from 4th edition (pages 194-195) choosing the mission by rolling D3. Then it's not always going to be just a simple 'wipe out the enemy' mission.

EDIT: In the intro section of the new rulebook, there is a note to existing players that says in part that there are rules changes that add to the challenge, without sacrificing the game play we know and love. Nowhere does it say that the entire 4th edition rulebook is scrapped. CP, Battle Missions, Raid Missions and Kill-Team are all part of the game play (that we know and love ) and 5th edition says we are not sacrificing that aspect. Wouldn't that mean that though the "standard missions" have changed, all of the extra missions would still be "official"?

As Matt said playing an Annialation mission for 500 pts while using the 4th Ed patrol force restrictions worked well.

Well I would say that as I won......okay I had 3 Vraxian Renegades left trying to be as small as possible LOL while 9 pissed off looking marines closed on their position when the game ended but I had killed 4 of Matts units (He started with 6) and he had killed 3 of mine.

This does beg the question though on Annialate missions - where a unit gives away points - is this fair? - I suppose it is a balance between flexibility or unit strength.

Discuss

getting the balance right for scoring units will be a new thing to learn. I went for 5 small units of Troops to maximise on scoring units but having 6 units vs 4 in a game which rollled up a KP mission worked against me.

re: official missions. What would make them "unofficial"?

WolflordHavoc wrote:This does beg the question though on Annialate missions - where a unit gives away points - is this fair? - I suppose it is a balance between flexibility or unit strength.
Discuss

Of course its fair -it totaly throws all tau and eldar out of the game which is as it should be..it also might rise the mighty beast into getting involved in the whole KP debate if he realises that MEQ suddenly balance out all their negatives by only having 2 killpoints, so only need to kill 2 of those pointy eared freaks and communist do gooders to make the game unwinnable for the xenoscum.
Can anyone find the original 40k in 40minutes rules from the black goblin magazine (apprently you have to use internet acrhiver engines and stuff.
.. those were slightly different and might lend themselves more to pet projects IIRC they were much more liberal (e.g. "no ordinance unless its really funny" was a rule IIRC)

mattjgilbert wrote:re: official missions. What would make them "unofficial"?

Sorry, I was reading this

LordMalekTheRedKnight wrote:and no, dropping CP altogether to play "proper games" isnt an option.

as being that "proper games" were the only official ones. I would guess the only true definition of "official games" would be those played at a tournament, and even those would (or could) be modifications dependent on the tournament rules and directors.

ah... when we tell Tim to play "proper" games we mean 1500-2000 points and not CP

here is the original WD version: http://uk.games-workshop.com/warhammer4 ... 0mins1.pdf

mattjgilbert wrote:ah... when we tell Tim to play "proper" games we mean 1500-2000 points and not CP

Thank you for the enlightenment!

(some of this is gleaned from japuda and shadowvast(chig GD) who run CP tournies and had to adlib stuff, hope they don't mind me borrowing)Some is from the thread on CP balance from a way back.

no more than 2 HQ, 3 elite, heavy, fast attack, or 6 troops slots can be filled. (so no 5 single FA 1 av units)

Cp restrictions from the big book on not *using* any ordinance carries over.(although tanks may come with them disabled?.remember 40k in 40minutes allows ordinance )

You may have no more than 3 models with an armor value (Its light tactics for F^^$&s sake, fine take 3 tanks but not 4)- most places its 2 btw.

You may include selections with more than two wounds at the normal point cost, but you must change the number of wounds in model’s profile to two. Scarab swarms created by a tomb spider would also have two wounds.(A great rule lifted from premotional material for chicago games day) (means that super uber spawn and scarabs and nurglings are actually allowed if you really want)

Necron phase out removed (they can't have acces to the ressie orb either so it balances out and if we strip off phase out someone might actually play as necrons in a CP for once..

You are freed from having to take mandatory selections and selection restrictions from your codex. For example, the Space Wolves do not have to take an HQ and Imperial Guard may take a conscript platoon without first taking an infantry platoon.(also taken from chicago GD premotional material)Frees up assassins priests etc..fluff can compensate..and it lets folks adjust for playing such a punitivily small bracket. (as we've been saying about penitents and as the big book says)


Here is some interesting extra missions to play if folks feel like it
http://uk.games-workshop.com/warhammer4 ... 0mins2.pdf

Now how about we discuss the concept of FNP, FNP on a basic LATD gruntling with a 4+ saves sounds acceptable.. but an invulnerable then FNP or a MEQ save plus FNP..I think then your playing against the spirit of no 2+s and wound caps...maybe we should put a model cap on how many inv and 3+s can have FNP, maybe say 10 models per army for fairness..