Warhammer 40K: It’s About The Missions
Warhammer 40,000 9th is on the horizon and missions are going to make a big impact – one way or another.
Missions and their objectives are going to make or break 9th edition. I’m calling it now. The Missions are going to be the core part of the game that impacts everything. We learned during the Q&A that missions would help facilitate the size of the games and the CP generation. That will impact how you build your lists. And it will also impact how play your armies.
But let’s take a step back and look at where we are now compared to what GW has said they wanted to do. Currently missions:
- Tell you how to deploy
- Determine the number of objectives
- Don’t really matter because I’m just going to wipe you off the board and get the win that way (at least for Matched Play)
The last point is hyperbole…mostly. Currently, as a “win” condition in 40k, if your army gets tabled, you lose. The objectives don’t matter. The points you’ve scored previously don’t matter. If you’re tabled, that’s a loss for you and win for the other player. Again, we’re talking Matched Play here. And many Tournament Organizers have tried to come up with interesting scenarios and workarounds – look at the ITC setup with all their bonus points you can score. There was a LOT of work that went into that for this very reason. You still lose…you just get some points on the way out.
So what does GW want to do with the new 40K Missions?
- They want missions to be more balanced for Matched Play
- They want missions to be more immersive for Narrative
- They want missions to be simple and meaningful for Open Play.
- They want lots of variety.
Now, as far as Narrative, Open and (now) Crusade play – those have always been more up to the player(s) to make the missions work for what they want to do with them. “You get what you put in” so to speak. But for Matched Play, the missions have struggled with “balance” for the competitive scene. These problems have been exacerbated by the way Command Points are generated by way of the Detachment system. Now, missions will fundamentally change those two things.
CPs won’t be based on Detachments any more…
The changes to the CP generation and the value of the different unit types (ie Troops vs Non-Troops) will be directly impacted by the missions and their objectives. As mentioned above, CPs will be determined by the mission/size of the game. That keeps it balanced for both players. No need to build some wonky Detachment Frankenstein list any more. “Soup” lists will still work – but you’ll be spending CPs to include those other options.
But what about the value of Troops vs Non-Troops? This is where things get even more interesting. Troops and Objective Secured really made them valuable. You could take those “Troop Tax” units in a Detachment and at least stick them on an objective. Plus they unlocked CPs for you. But what about now? Well, it doesn’t seem like Objective Secured is going away. That’s good. However, they have lost out on the CP generation which is a direct hit on their value.
More Room For Fast Attack Options? Cool.
It was specifically said that players won’t need to bring the Troop options in the same way they do now. “You don’t need to bring the Loyal 32” to unlock CPs. I think on the surface that’s a positive thing. But what I’m worried about now is that folks are just going to go hard into the non-Troop options in their lists. Not needing Troops for CPs could allow players to bypass those units completely in favor of more “killy” options in other slots. Sure, you could do the same thing now – you just missed out on CPs. But in 9th? That isn’t the case.
The Fix?
If GW really wants to change the way players interact with missions and the game there is one really easy fix: Remove getting tabled as a loss condition. Force players to score via the objectives. Force players to play the mission instead of just go all offense and Alpha Strike their opponent off the board. And, if Troops still have Objectives Secured, they now have a VERY important role to play and maintain that value on the tabletop.
Age of Sigmar doesn’t have it as a Win/Loss Condition and their core missions are much better than 40k’s core missions.
There are a lot of interlocking things that are getting tweaked in 9th edition. It’s sounds very much like a bunch of gears in a clock that have been honed in on and tweaked. But, to further that analogy, the biggest gear sounds like missions. They influence CPs. They influence how you want to build your army. They will impact the size games you play and the spaces you play them on. And, ultimately, they will impact how you play your army on the tabletop. Games Workshop really needs to make sure their missions are solid if they are going to influence the rest of the game to this degree. Otherwise, players will just ignore the missions and go back to the “table your opponent” strategy. Here’s hoping they nailed it.
A Quick Note: Many of the most recent Chapter Approved Missions don’t have the same Sudden Death Clause…perhaps it’s a hint at how GW’s Mission philosophy is changing in 9th.
Play to the Missions.
