Welcome to Librarium Online!
Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!
Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!
Hi, me and two other people usually play during the week and we've been playing some three way warhammer40k games. I was wondering which would be the best way to set-up and play a three way game because the way that me and the other two people usually set up is by using the normal rules, rolling a dice between the three of us to see what misson and deployment type then going from there. One problem that occurs is that for example (this happened today): it was an objective game with spearhead deployment (table quarters) so both my friends deploy opposite of each other which leaves me stuck in between both of them, to make things worse I happen to go last and with two other players already on the board (deployed and so on as with me), it ended up that by my first turn, i had already lost about 35% of my forces before my first turn, it was also a 1,500pt game just to let you know so thats around 500 - 600pts that I didn't even get to use by being shot and assaulted afterwards by the two different armies being played, and in a game that small, thats a lot. so the question is, is there a different way that that game could have been set up to be more fair or at least made equal in all aspects of game play. If you also wanted to know I played Darkangels (which after looking at the new space marine codex made me want to throw away my darkangels one for the new one) and my other friends played imperial guard and choas space marines (undivided).
Practical answer- not really. 40K is built more for two opposing sides. A common response to this particular situation is to split players into two teams where the teams have equal points. The other issue is that when you get over about 4500 pts, the table gets pretty crowded with 3 opposing armies. There is a scenario in the big rulebook (not sure if it's in AoBR one) that is built for 3 players, but is really built for only 500-1000pts mostly because of how limited your deployment gets.
Alternative answer- While objectives are conducive to multiple players somewhat, deployment types aren't. One deployment you could try is the first player picks either a table corner or the center of a long board edge. If he chooses a corner, the next player may either choose the opposite corner on the same long board edge or the center of the opposite long board edge and the last person gets what left. Should he choose the center of a long board edge, the next player chooses a corner on the opposite long board edge. You end up with a basic triangle deployement. You then determine a distance from the corner/center of board edge that would give each player adequate deployment. You're still gonna run into issues with the number of models depending on game sizes.
My opinion- Easier rules-wise and space-wise to just run teams.
Blais's Paint Studio-Getting broken armies good soft scores since 2009
thanks for the help, yea I know what mission it is, its on page 187 in the 5th edition(although me and the other players didn't think about it until after the game). also here is another question that came up into this game, now I know that vehicles can fire all main and defensive weapons (or ordanance by itself) and one main and all defensive weapons if it moved at cruising speed and so on, but one of my friends that I played with (it was in the game that I mentioned above) was arguing that because the choas players rhino had moved that he couldn't fire at full distance with his twin-linked bolters because they were rapid fire weapons instead of counting it as a defensive weapon (his rhino moved 6" inches just to let you know and was trying to fire them at the full 24" inches). now heres my other question: because its a vehicle then it can always choose to fire its weapons within the acceptable distance and in the right circumstances fire at full range regardless of weapon type?
Last edited by Brinjolfur; February 17th, 2009 at 05:28. Reason: forgot to type some stuff in
pg. 58 of the rulebook under the MOVING AND SHOOTING VEHICLE WEAPONRYIn addition, the normal penalties for movement on shooting rapid fire and heavy weapons do not apply...
Blais's Paint Studio-Getting broken armies good soft scores since 2009
I only have two friends that play warhammer so we end up playing a lot of 3-way games. We made a board that can be set up either as an 8"x4" rectangle, or a 45-45-90 triangle with dimensions 8' x8' x11' 3.7". You can deploy up to twelve inches along the 8' edge, and up to 1' 4.97" along the long edge. This can typically work for any game type, but capture and control (is that what it's called) doesn't work as well. The one drawback is that the person in the right angle corner gets ganged up on more than the other two because they're kind of in the middle.
In that case, the middle deployment could be compensated by, dunno, maybe an extra 200-400 points to his army? Whoever's at a disadvantage should get some type of advantage to even it out. For example, this is done in apocalypse games by giving extra strategic assets to the army which is at a disadvantage or has less points. Another possible solution is to give the middle army full deployment whereas the 2 side armies only deploy half their armies and keep the rest in reserves to be rolled for (kinda like dawn of war).
So if my Chimera moves at Combat speed, it could fire it's turret-mounted heavy bolter, pintle-mounted Heavy Stubber, AND the 6 hull-mounted lasguns could be fired up to 24". Is this correct? B/C my friends and I have been unde the assumption that since the chimera moved, the rapid fire lasguns could only fire 12".
Also as to the OP - My roomates and I play 3-ways a bit. We either have one person build an army twice the size, or go corner-corner-opposing center.
ANother thing we've found is that a 7' board works very well for larger (3 or 4 players with 2K pt armies each) battles.
"The objective is to win, the point is to have fun."
We have played 3 Way battles many times. How we usually do it is set up impassable terrain to help divide the table up a bit more and make sure that they objectives are placed fairly for all three parties or even placed a single objective and have all three fight for it. Usually when we did the single objective it was a building or something similar in size.
Our group plays three way battles regularly (any time we have an odd number of people show up), and we always use the Broken Alliance Rules on P.272-273 of the BGB. While at first some of these rules seem odd and unworkable (especially the turn sequence), after you play with them it really works. It is the only way we have managed to have three way battles that do not end up with two players teaming up on one.
The only modification that we have had to make is to define deployment zones as the three feet of the long table edge behind your base camp, with out overlapping any other players deployment zone. We ran into an issue once where two players were sharing a long table edge (and there fore both players could bring in reserves from anywhere on it, and one of them brought them in right behind his opponents base camp.) So it works out that two players split one long table edge in half, and the other player gets three feet of the opposing table edge centered on his base camp.
The other thing we are considering is playing this mission with out the HQs starting in the center of the board but we have not yet tested this.
All in all the broken alliance mission is one of the most enjoyable mission types we have played and I highly recommend it for anyone trying to do three way battles. Just keep in mind that all three of the mission special rules are critical to making it work properly.
Primary Army: Tyranids; Secondary Army: Space Wolves
It's Illeagle, but it' s not that illeagle. - John Public