Remember me

Forgot Password?


Battle missions- the reason to play 40k :D

Discussion of rules in Warhammer 40K - use for existing rules only, for discussing new rules or changes/alternatives use the Rules Development forum

Moderator: mattjgilbert

Battle missions- the reason to play 40k :D

Postby killmaimburn » Tue Mar 09, 2010 10:12 am

Battle missions- the reason to play 40k- (rules query half way down)
Our group were quorate for the first time since the GT. (well frog was able to turn up- the others who float around the periperhy are floaters)

We were stoked.. I convinced them to play battle missions.
1st game- me vs frog 750 to get him back in

I took DPwings lash
Possessed landraider combimelta, with 8 zerkers fist
crazed dreadnought 2CCWs.

He took farseer, 3 waveserpents 2 units of fire dragons 1 direavengers.

We rolled a chaos mission of killpoints,where we all got stuborn and preferred enemy..and a kind of meatgrinder (infantry could resurect through reserves).
Changed the dynamic dire avengers were able to tar pit my dreadnought +DP lol..
I won 12 killpoints to 1 (you got double for killing respawns).
Great game.

2nd game Mr6's eldar (falcons waveserpents fire dragons etc) vs Ljundhammers deathwing (2 crusaders belial, 3 shooty termie squads each with 1 chainfist chaplin-the template ;) )
Rolled an eldar one to do with split armies and striking from turn one in reserve.
Seemed to work in eldar favour in that the mech skimmer thing had built in autarchs..
But his reluctance to commit to the landraiders meant it was a draw ( 3 objectives in a perfect triangle..2 of which were contested by both).
Looked great fun.

3rd game Mr6's eldar vs Ljundhammers deathwing
Rolled a space marine one- which was the one about terminators protecting the dark angel monastry- how awesomely fluffy.
Setting up on the 24" line really helped the deathwing (who are a 24" range army. And having to aggressively come on piecemeal really messed up the mech eldar..
Bloody and insane battle.
Draw from turn 5- till turn 11. A true war of attrition.

Funnny fluffy and an interesting way of twisting the meta.

Rules query.

I'm fairly sure I got this one wrong..(I was handling the admin and rules that meant we managed to get 3 games in within 4 hours)
But it so hurt my brain trying to get it right we figured we'd post it here (also the picture of our 'fix' is so wrong it looks beautiful)
Anyhow.. we have an objective ontop of a building (we did this within 10 minutes of ridiculing phil and nige for doing this)
It has a termie unit sat on it.. falcon (by arranged agreement ) are trying to mungle their way onto the objective (a bit houseruley- don’t get distracted).
1) Skimmers can move over terrain, friendly and enemy models p71
2) Common consensus this can be done just prior to (and potentially after successful) ramming/tankshocking
3) The skimmer cannot END its move over enemy models..

So Mr6 divebombs his precious rare and indangered elder at the large ruin.
2 wavesperpents 1 falcon.. All get stunned by death or glory fists by the termie squad. Therefore coming to a halt.p69 “directly in front of the heroic individual”
But wait for it…. He has flown over 2 landraider crusaders to get to the place he is hurting… and in stopping immediately he now occupies the same space time as the landraider he just flew over (we also forgot dangerous terrain tests but meh..I think we also forgot that all his vehicles had the eldar extra armour too).

So ljundhammer off the cuff says “are they destroyed? Which one?”

I rather hastily use the “If some enemy models in the enemy unit would end up underneath the vehicle when it reaches its final position[..]these models must be moved out of the way by the shortest distance, leaving at least 1" between them and the vehicle and maintaining unit coherency.” To say the landraider shuffles out the way (although it is not part of the targeted unit)
I believe LH may not have been pleased with this (it did shuffle him out of even tenous range of being on the objective and I had made 2 other calls which had not been in his favour already.)

Anyway..all in all it gave us this rather monsterous beauty..(rules lawyers cry)
And someone see if they can come up with a better soloution for the future.
Barely even lurking..
ruffian4 wrote:Handy fellow, this kmb...Like Ahriman delving the paths of the webway ...
World of ME First try at Apoc Batrep WHAT/WHO is AOS?
User avatar
Now Vanus Clade
Posts: 6581
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 12:00 am
Location: Nottingham, mid-land
Blog: View Blog (1)

Re: Battle missions- the reason to play 40k :D

Postby LordMalekTheRedKnight » Tue Mar 09, 2010 10:52 am

Couldnt you have moved the Tank Shocking Skimmer backwards along its route until it reached a legal point to stop (the other side of the Landraider)?

Just off the top of my head...

~ Tim
8O :D OMG - Im a Dad - of THREE!! :D 8O
:) I am "LMTRK" on The Wizards Community and MTG Salvation
User avatar
Lord Marmite
Lord General
Posts: 4876
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 12:00 am
Location: Stamford, Lincs, UK

Re: Battle missions- the reason to play 40k :D

Postby DaBoss » Tue Mar 09, 2010 4:58 pm

Wow - you're right; even more weird situation than me and King had.

Looking through the rules - nothing jumps to mind - it's one of those odd ball situations....

Best I can say is that I would have gone with rolling a d6
1-3 Move the Land Raider out of the way
4-6 Place the Wave Serpent/Falcon the shortest distance away from point of Stun which is legal (not within 1" of enemy models)
User avatar
Junior Officer
Junior Officer
Posts: 894
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 12:00 am
Location: High Wycombe
Blog: View Blog (43)

Re: Battle missions- the reason to play 40k :D

Postby WolflordHavoc » Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:18 pm

I would say that as the Falcon has 'failed' it moves the minimum distance neccessary back in a way as to not disavantage the winning player!

Or the Falcon is destroyed but thats a bit harsh so I am going with the first idea!

Or the vehicle with the lowest combined armor value is displaced (In this case the Falcon) but again I don't see why a player carrying out an illegal move (in this case due to a 'failed' tank shock manouver) should get an advantage out of it and by extension potentially disadvantaging the other player.
User avatar
Veteran Sergeant
Veteran Sergeant
Posts: 300
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 12:00 am

Re: Battle missions- the reason to play 40k :D

Postby Culven » Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:24 pm

Personally, I wouldn't have allowed the Land Raider to move. There isn't anything in the rules allowing Vehicles to give way. I would have probably just gone with "place the Skimmer on the table as close as possible to the Terminators" and made up some excuse that it drifted a bit after being hit.
Commander, Catachan XIII "Black Cats"
Pray that a Black Cat never crosses your path.
User avatar
Junior Officer
Junior Officer
Posts: 783
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 12:00 am
Location: At a desk working on one of too many projects.

Re: Battle missions- the reason to play 40k :D

Postby Ljundhammer » Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:38 pm

I can exclusivley reveal that Battlemissions is made of WIN! Definately spices up the normal 40k experience.

Both games were excelent & being divebombed by falcons was a right laugh - Mr Chainfist says "NO!"

Moving my LandRaider out of the way of a falcon because it crashed seemed odd, but it did allow me to shoot its rear armour, so no real bad. Given that all that was left by turn 11 was 2 imobilised LRCs and a Farseer, it didn't really affect the game. I think that next time this happens :lol:, I prefer the consus of the falcon moving back (to where it started in this case!)
When in deadly danger
When beset by doubt
Run in little circles
Wave your arms and shout
- parody of the litany of command
User avatar
Posts: 1563
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 12:00 am
Location: Nottingham - the North

Return to 40K Rules

 Social Links