Subtle yet massive change to Flames V4 missions

[Matt Varnish]

So, on the website, they posted a blurb from Phil and Wayne about how 6 months on, they realize too many draws, and so here are the new win conditions.  And the first time I read them i didnt 'Get it"

Verbatim:

WINNING THE GAME
• The Attacker wins if they start their turn on or after the
sixth turn with a Tank, Infantry, or Gun team within
4”/10cm of an Objective, and end it with no Defending
Tank, Infantry, or Gun teams within 4”/10cm of that
Objective.
• The Defender wins if they end a turn on or after the sixth
turn with no Attacking Tank, Infantry, or Gun teams
within 8”/20cm of the Objectives.

So now you dont win the game at the start of your turn but at the end.  No more can your enemy send in one light vehicle or one inf team to contest an objective to force one more turn, as that one team can easily be destroyed.   You start your turn on an objective, contested or not, and WIN the game if you can destroy the contesting teams.

Thoughts?

[lothlann]

yes they can, only the defender wins at the end of their turn, the attacker only wins at the start of their turn.

The defender can send in 1 unit each turn to stop the attacker from winning, the defender just has to wipe out the attacker near the objective to win, the defender gets a big advantage now. If he circles the objective at 8" and the attacker cant break him by turn 6 he wins.

This makes defending with infantry much easier then camping with tanks sniping units trying to get within 8". Going to make very boring games if its a mission that the attacker has to take an objective and the defender just has to hold on.

On the other hand it means you have to attack, it forces the attacker to be more aggressive but the defender doesn't have to do anything.

Now i forget the missions but in the "balanced" missions, like 2 objectives on either side. are you both attackers or is one still attacker and defender?

I thought draws were you both lost.

[CA$H]

yes they can, only the defender wins at the end of their turn, the attacker only wins at the start of their turn.

That's incorrect I think Chris,

Let's read that again, and I will bold key words in the middle of this HORRIBLY written win condition rule:

WINNING THE GAME
• The Attacker wins if they start their turn on or after the
sixth turn with a Tank, Infantry, or Gun team within
4”/10cm of an Objective, and end it with no Defending
Tank, Infantry, or Gun teams within 4”/10cm of that
Objective.
• The Defender wins if they end a turn on or after the sixth
turn with no Attacking Tank, Infantry, or Gun teams
within 8”/20cm of the Objectives.

Badly written win conditions are bad....

[lothlann]

Oh i missed the 2nd part of " and end it with no Defending Tank, Infantry, or Gun teams within 4”/10cm of that Objective."

So the attacker has to start the turn with a model on the objective then by the end on the same turn have cleared any defenders.

So it still makes attacking much harder then defending.

The problems with draws is that defenders have it to easy, this gives the defenders a huge advantage because it would be very hard to start a turn within 4" on the objective as an attacker because you would have to flood the objective and survive a turn of shooting.

[CA$H]

I agree

The onus is completely on the attacker to win "or else" - at least that's how I read it...

Why it cant be the same for both, I am not sure...

[Matt Varnish]

Heh i read it like Chris did first pass too. Keep in mind that was taken from ONE mission, I think the fair fight ones are the same for both, will check later.

Team Yankee getting same treatment, but these are proposed changes.. but its badly written, or WELL WRITTEN if you speak NZer

[lothlann]

The problem is the missions, the objectives are always in the deployment zones. One of the reasons i wanted to try battle group, its very different for winning. Each time you lose a unit or your opponent takes an objective you take a random counter (there are other ways to for your opponent counters as well), if you go over your limit you retreat, some counters and boons as well, its random and it makes you make your list more interesting because they all have different moral stat.

[Twinlinked]

I like the idea of more agressive win conditions, the attackers being forced to attack is good,

I wonder if this will be in place by nationals..

A.

[Matt Varnish]

i already posted on the BF forums about if we are using them. Played a game last night, the defensive victory conditions had been slightly tweaked also: old breakthrough Defender wins if no enemy model within 16 inches of an objective, now it was 8 inches. I had some pretty awful luck and lost 2 of 3 King Tigers to Gammon bomb wielding Airborne on turn 2, still made a game of it though for another 7 turns. Also, Matt's bullshit triple 6 armour saves on his fireflies was a little game-changing as well

[Sponsored content]