intotheeyejan07 - page 1 of 1

INTO the EYE

An investigation into the deepest and darkest nooks of the GW Universe

By Mike Brandon [January 2007]

Welcome to the ninth volume of ‘Into the Eye’, a look into the finer parts of the GW

hobby.

In the beginning..... or how do we start things?

To kick off the first 'Into the Eye' of 2007 I thought I'd start at the

beginning or rather look at different ways to actually start a game of 40k. The

basic 2nd edition rulebook sees you dicing for who deploys first by adding the

strategy rating of your army and then dicing again for the first turn using the

commander’s strategy rating. The purpose of this article is to suggest

alternatives and potentially better more balanced ways to beginning the game.

Firstly though, lets look at the three core components to starting a game

–

Picking sides

There are several approaches to this, either you dice for it, decide amongst each other, have the person

deployed the scenery pick second etc. Currently in OGC we have combined this part with the next…

Deciding who deploys first

This is the straight up dice roll, unless you are using specific missions. You both roll

a dice and add your army strategy rating, this represent the ability for an army to deploy to the

battlefield, ie, Space Marines are a lightning strike force so there will be high, whereas Tyranids are

most likely the victims of an attack and so there strategy rating is low. It also represents the army size,

for example the hgher the rating, the smaller the army to generally represent that smaller armies need

to deploy second based on a larger armies ability to soak up more fire-power, though in practice that

isn’t always the case. Under OGC’s present rules, we combine this roll with the table side, whoever

loses picks a side and then deploys, this creates a counter-balance, the negative aspect of deploying

first is countered with the fact that you get to choose the best table edge for you.

Deciding who goes first

Now things become trickier. As standard, you each roll, and add you commander’s strategy rating,

representing their general expertise on the field, or the nature of the army itself. Typically this goes

hand in hand with the previous strategy rating bit there are exceptions, for example Chaos and Orks

both have higher first turn strategy ratings to reflect their need and ability to be able to react quickly.

In the event of a tie roll, the result goes down to the commander’s initiative and if this fails then it is

simply a re-roll. The winner goes first, the idea that having the very first turn or having the very last

turn are both just as valuable. However there is debate. Having to deploy first and move second can be

a massive disadvantage, so much so that current OGC champion James Brown see’s such a result as a

potential game winner, in response, OGC Senior Simon Gray points out the value of moving last, so

where do we draw middle ground?

As I see it, our system works rather well, but there are instances where the deploy first move second can be

devastating, for smaller armies anyway. However, the issues seem to arise from two key factors. The first is same race

battles, for example this debate was sparked from a set of Space Marine on Space Marine encounters. It is perhaps the

nature of these partcualr battles that do mean whoever gets the luck has a distinct advantage when going like for like.

From a personal perspective as a Chaos player in a predominantly Imperial Space Marine environment I always prepare

my forces to deploy first and go second but then this is more in nature of my army. However is it not the mark of a great

player, when one can pull of victories when luck does not shine? It has always been my approach, bad days are bad

days, but the key is in the army selection and then what you are prepared for. The second issue is scenery, and that is we

are evolving from a ‘no scenery in deployment zones’ ethos to the exact opposite. This mirrors our move up in the table

size stakes from 4x4, to 5x4 to 6x4 (the recommended size). There are lessons form no scenery in the deployment zones

though, and that is, vantage points and bunkers should never be present. It’s not just here though, you cannot allow for

the so-called ‘tank-routes’ that allow vehicles and unimpeded drive to the enemy front-line. To draw conclusion, this is

an open debate but I would defend our current system, although would welcome new ideas. The opening turn is an

important time, even if not a kill occurs, and in that focus, is there truly a perfect balance that can be struck?

Strange Visions

Kain

This month, the Vampiric legend that chose himself over the fate of

Nosgoth, the anti-hero with his very own 'Legacy', Kain! Murdered

as a young man and resurrected as a vampire to do the bidding of

Arial, guardian of the Pillars of Nosgoth, Kain eventually went on

to sit upon the throne of the corrupted pillars himself! Kain would

be best suited leading a Vampire Counts army based around a

Sylvania set-up, as he quests in his search to destroy the Elder God

and free himself from the wheel of time.

Troop Type

Save

Points

Kain

400

Weapons – Soul Reaver [physical form] – No armour saves may be taken from hits from the Soul Reaver, in

addition hits from this Soul Reaver cause D3 wounds.

Armour – Steel Carapace (4+ save)

Special – Undead. Level 3 Wizard with the Black Arts. Abilities: Heart Piercing, Master Strike & Quick

Blood. Draw: for every wound caused by Kain, he will regain a lost wound on a 6+ on account of his ability

to draw the blood instantly and at distance from his victims.

Painting image 'Green Wheat Field' by Vincent Van Gogh (1889)

Kain is from the Legacy of Kain series published by Eidos (1996-2004)