Hailstorm Protocol- Mission Monday

A number of communities play with house rules Rules limiting order allocation. We have rewritten some of the ideas into a scenario.

Hailstorm Protocol- Mission Monday

With the risk of a sensitive data leak- a devastating jamming protocol has been released on all comms ports. Take down the Jamming towers and recover the data chips from the rubble.

3 Jamming Towers are placed evenly (12 inches apart) along the center line of the board.

Each Jamming tower is Arm5, BTS-6, and STR 2. When it is destroyed, place a DATAchip marker where the Jamming tower was.

This scenario lasts 4 turns

Each Jamming tower destroyed- 1VP
Each model in Base contact with a DATAchip at the end of the game- 2VP

While at least one Jamming tower is in play- The maximum number of regular orders that may be spent on a model in a turn is limited. The number of orders that may be spent on a model in a turn is based on the number of towers in play. This does not affect impetuous or LT orders-
When orders are spent on a link team, each model counts as if an order is being “spent” on it (for purposes of whether another order may be spent on it)- this means if none of the towers are destroyed, you cannot spend more than 3 orders on a link team- and breaking or changing the team doesn’t change this).

3 towers- No model may be given more than 3 orders
2 towers- No model may be given more than 6 orders
1 tower- No model may be given more than 9 orders

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Hailstorm Protocol- Mission Monday

  1. dlfleetw says:

    I was initially sceptical of the idea (because house rules) buy I like the application in the scenario. The link team limitation, while it makes sense, is a little clunky (if I am reading it correctly, 5 man links count as 5 orders per activation?)

    The jamming portion, for some factions, is just an infiltrating specialist with D charges away from not being relevant)

    I give this a go with our group and see how it pans out.

  2. Robock says:

    I'll try it this friday, at both 200 and 300 pts, with and without 12 XP SpecOp. So 4 lists that I'll ready to face various player's preferences of point values.

  3. Robock says:

    if i read correctly, spending 3 orders on my link team, means that each participating link team member have received 3 order each (although you only reduce your order pool by 3 order total). If you then break your link team, each models that had been in the link are already at 3 order count out of the mximum count.

  4. endalyon says:

    Thanks! I think that "testing" other group's house rules in the context of a scenario are a nice way to approach it.

    I might take another crack at rewriting the Link team rules. If you spend an order on a link team- each model in the link team counts as have "spent" an order- thereby you cannot spend more than x orders on a link team (even if you reform, break or change the team)

    The jamming portion is one of those first turn choices- The player that goes after the jamming towers is then spending those orders (and deployment of their infiltrators) destroying the towers (for a few VP admittedly)- and not their opponent. As a further risk- destroying the towers gives your opponent the greater opportunity to use those "unjammed" orders.

    I would definitely love to hear feedback from other people playing the scenario- so let me know how it goes!

  5. dlfleetw says:

    I do have a question, how would you distribute points if there is a D-charge planted and an enemy model shoots a missile launcher, an engineer AROs 'detonate' so you've got the possibility of both sides destroying a jammer at the same time?

    • endalyon says:

      I would have to double check- but I am pretty sure you cannot detonate a d-charge in ARO.

      IF for whatever reason, a Jamming tower is eliminated by "both" players simultaneously- Both players get the VP

    • dlfleetw says:

      Its part of the D-Charge rule (that they can be placed Or detonated as an ARO) and has come up as part of the Lifeblood ITS scenario previously. Placing them is considered an attack (so has to target the model that generated the ARO) but detonating isn't one (according to Palanka)

    • endalyon says:

      well, thats what I get for not checking the wiki (I just double checked- and didn't manage to edit by your response)

      Either way- same rule applies- both players get the VP for simultaneous destruction. I think that is probably best….

    • Robock says:

      Assuming of course that both attack managed to do 2+ damage individually (or did 1 damage each). I once detonated a D-Charge on a crate and the crate passed all 3 saves.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *