500 Points about 500 Points (Lists, Touraments & Rules, oh my!)

[Ed]

[Benjamin]

Chase and I chatted today, made great strides! Got a tentative date and the prize structure laid out.

Our mission now, should we choose to accept it, is to create mission objectives and game types. I'm hoping to avoid Ard Boyz silliness. Keep 'em short, keep 'em simple. Tie-breaker is always Victory Points, and if that's a draw, then the result is a draw (1/2 win).

Here's what Sam and I came up with (though Sam was distracted by Superman Returns). One thing I'm noticing is how over 5 rounds, the most balanced lists are likely going to achieve victory.

3 Objectives. There are two variants of this, and I can see both being used. The first variant has an objective in the center of the table, with an objective marker in the center of each table half.



The second variant has objectives stretched and spread evenly across the table mid-line.



One controversial mission objective is Kill Models. Similar to Kill Points, except players tally the number of models killed. This one is truly up in the air, definitely need feedback.

We considered a Kill HQ! mission, but it seemed likely that players would just hide the HQs all game. But it was pointed out, if someone takes a big HQ choice (200+ points), that's a huge part of the army not playing.

We decided a Kill Troops! mission would be better overall.

Here's one we got excited about, but it's rough. This is the one that stretches what we're comfortable with, which isn't a bad thing...

Mission - Table Quarters
Deployment -
Players roll off to determine who goes first. The player who goes first chooses a long table edge to be his own. Players designate one quarter along their table edge in which the opponent cannot deploy. This is the Home Quarter. Players then alternate deploying units, rolling randomly to determine in which table quarter that unit can deploy. Units cannot deploy within 12" of an enemy unit. Should a unit be unable to deploy in the randomly determined table quarter, the unit instead deploys in Home Quarter.

Example:


That's only like 4 decent ideas, and we'll need 5 solid ones.

[Benjamin]

Woke up with this list in mind.

Mini-Chopstar

Herald of Khorne (Blessing of the Blood God)
Herald of Khorne (Blessing of the Blood God)
Bloodcrushers x4 (Fury of Khorne, Chaos Icon, Instrument of Chaos)
Nurglings x3
Nurglings x3

Not a great list, just amusing. And for a variant...

Skulltaker (Juggernaut)
Bloodcrushers x4 (Fury of Khorne, Chaos Icon, Instrument of Chaos)
Nurglings x3
Nurglings x3
Nurglings x3

Something else...

Herald of Nurgle (Unholy Might)
Nurglings x3
Nurglings x3
Fiends of Slaanesh x6
Fiends of Slaanesh x6

12 Fiends at 500 points. Ew.

[Banosby]

3-Objectives: Good. Doesn't really matter which option you go with. Depends on whether you like shooty or choppy armies more I guess. Personally, I'd go with Spearhead deployment and put the two non-center objectives in the non-deployment quarters, but that's just me.

Kill Troops: Hard to say, as I don't know how this is supposed to work. Do you get one point for each troop squad killed? Do you get one point for each troop squad you have left at the end of the game? Either way, you're heavily penalizing someone (either the people who took two troops, or the people who took many). How about something like a vp game where troops count for double vp? This could also work with the HQ thing; a VP game where the HQ counts as double. You could also do the reverse; a VP game where the troops or HQ count for half.

Kill models is bad. Very bad. Auto-lose for too many otherwise fine and balanced armies. Don't play orks. Or non-mech guard. Or Tyranids. It has all the problems of kill points, but worse. And none of the 'at least it punishes msu, which is otherwise awesome' benefit.

Generally, I think you should keep the five missions some combination of objectives and victory points. Here is a list of slight variations that are interesting enough to keep things varied, but not so interesting that they wreck what little balance you'll have at 500 points.

Two objectives.
Three objectives, as discussed.
Table Quarters.
Terrain 
All of the above can be modified to that you control those things with troops, or with a preponderance of vp, or by having more scoring units, or whatever.
VP
VP where certain squad types are worth more/less.
VP where certain squad types score more/less when they kill something.
Combination of VP and non-VP (i.e. you get one point for every objective you control and one point for every full 100 vp you score. Most points wins).

As for deployment, Spearhead and Pitched Battle are good. Dawn of War on a small table makes it too easy for first turn assaults. You new deployment idea is ok, but it favors assault armies pretty heavily and can really screw Daemons.

[Loranus]

Kill Models I been running the numbers on lists and im not sure what is good or not but. Im Averaging a list holding 11-25 models in it at 500 points. But like Tyranids can get up to the 61 models in 500 points before stuff like tervigon.

1st and 2nd one look good. Table Quarters one kinda again throws it to the wind because it being random a bad roll of the dice may stick your army in the middle of nowhere. Deep Striking type armies like Drop Pod assaults and Daemons may have a distinct advantage on it also being able to focus out guys left by their lonesome. And Yes its possible to build a Drop Pod army at 500 points which would do pretty well.

[Benjamin]

3-Objectives: Good. Doesn't really matter which option you go with. Depends on whether you like shooty or choppy armies more I guess. Personally, I'd go with Spearhead deployment and put the two non-center objectives in the non-deployment quarters, but that's just me.

I like that idea, another good variation. This also could work to good effect with just two objectives.

How about something like a vp game where troops count for double vp?

I like this.

Kill models is bad. Very bad. Auto-lose for too many otherwise fine and balanced armies. Don't play orks. Or non-mech guard. Or Tyranids. It has all the problems of kill points, but worse. And none of the 'at least it punishes msu, which is otherwise awesome' benefit.

Mmm, yeah, I had a feeling I was getting clever in over my skis. Would Kill Points actually work? I worry about some armies scoring 1 KP and just running away for the rest of the game.

Combination of VP and non-VP (i.e. you get one point for every objective you control and one point for every full 100 vp you score. Most points wins).

That's interesting!

You new deployment idea is ok, but it favors assault armies pretty heavily and can really screw Daemons.

I think on a bigger table, it might work better. Might. Agree with the other deployment assertions. I also think the diagonal deployment is also now feasible and reasonable.

[Benjamin]

And Yes its possible to build a Drop Pod army at 500 points which would do pretty well.

I wanna see a list. I can only fit two, and I have no room for an HQ. :|

[Loranus]

Space Wolves :O

Rune Priest
Grey Hunters w/ melta and Power Weapon and Drop Pod
Grey Hunters w/ melta and Power Weapon and Drop Pod
Grey Hunters w/ Flamer and Fist and Drop Pod

[Bill]

Ben just don't forget that nurglings are not scoring.

[Banosby]

Diagonal deployment is fine as well. I was just to lazy to explain it in case people weren't familiar with it. You might want to think about shortening the 12 inch zone because the tables are smaller.

[Benjamin]

Space Wolves :O

Rune Priest
Grey Hunters w/ melta and Power Weapon and Drop Pod
Grey Hunters w/ melta and Power Weapon and Drop Pod
Grey Hunters w/ Flamer and Fist and Drop Pod

Oh, well, say no more. I thought you were trying to build a list with Space Marines.

Ben just don't forget that nurglings are not scoring.

How aren't they? I acknowledge due to GW's lack of organizational and cross-referencing skills, there may be a rule buried out of place of which I'm not aware.

[Bill]

Swarms cannot claim objectives in 5th edition.

Edit: look under scoring units, not swarms.

[Benjamin]

Swarms cannot claim objectives in 5th edition.

Swarm special rule, nope. Nurglings, nope.
... Oh, there's the rule, on Page 90 with no mention anywhere else. Hmm. GW'ed again.

[Benjamin]

Diagonal deployment is fine as well. I was just to lazy to explain it in case people weren't familiar with it. You might want to think about shortening the 12 inch zone because the tables are smaller.

Pythagoras says 12" provides an a No Man's Land just under 17" across.

He goes on to say 9" would provide an No Man's Land just over 12" across.

Either one seems fine to me.

[Wes]

I might actually be able to throw together all my guard models and come up with 500 points... sounds interesting