Brother Tyler

Okay, Kill Team already has both Overwatch and Guard, the latter as part of the Close Quarters rules (which will definitely be used for this mission pack). I want to keep things simple. At this point, I'm thinking that all such eligible models (i.e., those equipped with an assault cannon, combi-bolter, or storm bolter) may perform any number of (or perhaps 2) Counteract actions (Shoot or Fight) with the appropriate weapon profile while On Guard. The rule would be worded something like the Deathwatch Marksman Veteran's Vigilant Marksman ability: This operative can perform the Guard action during its activation regardless of the killzone (see close quarters rules, Kill Team: Core Book). When using the close quarters rules, once per turning point, after this operative performs a free Shoot action on guard, it can immediately perform a free Guard action. However, if it does, it cannot counteract during that turning point (nor Guard twice if it's counteracted). The second sentence might be adjusted depending on the model - the twin lightning claw/thunder hammer and storm shield models would replace "Shoot" with "Fight," and the characters equipped with both combi-bolters/storm bolters and melee weapons might have "Fight or Shoot" instead. This would limit the effectiveness based on the model, so instead of being good at [Space Hulk] Overwatch and [Space Hulk] Guard, each model is only good at one or the other. This would end up being three "different" rules (i.e., different names). There are already more than enough Guard tokens in the starter set, so we wouldn't need to make anything new. The rule would have to be a special ability listed on the appropriate datarcards, specifying the weapon profile appropriate to the operative. The only real question concerns models equipped with both a combi-bolter/storm bolter and a melee weapon - should such operatives be limited to one or the other (Shoot or Fight), or could they use either option depending on the situation (since these are the character models who have more experience)? The storm shield (on Sergeant Gideon in the 3e/4e models) would have to work differently from the Deathwatch Aegis Veteran's storm shield since the latter only affects enemy shooting. I haven't quite worked through that, however. Perhaps each successful Attack Dice roll can block 2 of the enemy operative's similar (normal or critical) successful Attack Dice rolls? The Terminators would probably be limited to 5 models in a kill team. This would probably be more than a normal kill team can handle, but we're not creating this as a viable option for regular Kill Team. Instead, the missions in this mission pack will balance the Genestealer threat against the Terminators. For the Command Points, I'm thinking that these might be tactical ploys, each for a different level of character (Terminator Sergeant and Terminator Captain). These might allow models on guard to counteract and/or take an additional AP while being activated. Instead of allowing "d6" CPs, as in Space Hulk, it might be a fixed number - 2 for the Terminator Sergeant and 3 for the Terminator Captain; and where Space Hulk simply allows you to re-draw the CP counter, this mission pack would make the number fixed and they would stack (if we have a mission that includes both a Terminator Sergeant and the Terminator Captain - that's still unknown). And there's something percolating in my head about a chainfist being able to create a breach (I need to consult more on that).

This may be tied to a problem with gmail.com accounts, but we don't know if it's on the gmail side or the Invision side.

Just to be sure, are you talking about this edition of the game (2016)? Or this edition of the game (2013)? (links take you to the Board Game Geek entries) Or some other edition?

Has there been any progress on this? I can start working on concepts based on the ideas that have been presented so far (if no one else is able to). I'm a bit busy in Real Life right now, however, so I may not get to it until next week.

Those are some great inputs. I've been thinking about options, too, and will provide more complete thoughts here when I have a little more time (including considering the suggestions by @apologist and @LameBeard).

Yes, we could allow for more advanced notice of themes. I'm not sure that it's so much a workload increase as it is determining themes with sufficient time (which really only matters when we try to align themes with product releases). Of course, some cases might not be an issue as allowing for more time from the time a product hits the street might allow more members to get models painted up.

I noticed that yesterday, too. And just like last time, it has resolved itself without intervention. Weird. I suspect that this is tied to whatever it is that has been slowing the site down lately, too. We are exploring our options for a new server and when we make that move (which will also involve the update to Invision 5.0), I'm hopeful that the problem will be resolved.

Yes, all of that is well known. However, based on the name of the other "Chapter," I have a suspicion that these Adeptus Astartes are not painted in the scheme that we would recognize as the canon Rainbow Warriors.

While a ratio of 17 males to 3 females would have seemed on the higher side of what I would normally expect, the reverse is definitely surprising. I recently met a family in which every member - husband, wife, 1 son, 2 daughters - enjoys the hobby (which I think is absolutely great). While it's mildly disappointing that the females in your friend's class simply enjoy the painting and not the gaming, that demonstrates how the different aspects of the hobby allow for people with diverse interests to focus on the aspect(s) that appeal to them without feeling a need to dive into the other aspects for which they have little/no interest. After all, the artistic aspects of the game are a huge draw for me (and, I suspect, most of the members of this community), so it shouldn't be surprising that anyone that enjoys similar artistic endeavors and who isn't put off by the appearance of the models might similarly be drawn to the hobby simply for the joy of painting finely-sculpted models. And if they enjoy fantasy/sci-fi, it would be easy to see the Warhammer hobby appealing to them. From a neckbeard perspective, the non-canon minis might be a bit troubling. From a fun/social aspect, however, the "Rainbow Warriors vs. the Strawberry Cupcake Chapter" is hilarious. I wonder if there would be any room to entice more members of the club into playing the game if your friend could figure out a way to build something around the models they've painted.

I did something a little different this month. The themed challenges have been a bust, and there weren't any new submissions this month, so I picked one from among the existing submissions. We've had several members whose banners have been featured two or more times, so I chose a banner submitted by someone whose banners haven't been selected prior to this. Congratulations to @Rusted Boltgun for his image: Since @Rusted Boltgun doesn't have a blog in the Blogs feature, clicking on the banner image will take you to a WIP blog.

It is perfectly acceptable to discuss DIYs in the various forums (e.g., Astra Military, Adeptus Astartes, Orks, Aeldari, etc.). After all, the participants in those forums have a collective understanding of the (sub)factions that can prove very helpful to DIY developers.

Both of the options presented above are valid. Another option is to create a blog (in the Blogs feature using the Imperium > Astra Militarum and Imperial Army category). You can then create outreach/update topics in both the + ASTRA MILITARUM + and + THE LIBER + forums for entries. These outreach/update topics would notify other members of progress/information about your homebrew, pulling them into the blog so they can see your content and provide comments (i.e., engage in discussion with you). If your homebrew includes assembled/painted models, you could also create outreach/update topics in the + WORKS IN PROGRESS + and + HALL OF HONOUR + forums.

Some further thoughts (because you have successfully distracted me from a very important Real World project )... Some other boardgames you might consider looking at include Dune: War for Arrakis, Risk 2210 A.D., StarCraft: The Board Game, Dust, Rex: Final Days of an Empire, and others (some of these might be difficult to acquire, but most of free rules online). There are tons of games that are similar to Axis & Allies in terms of the game play, so you might find something that works better for what you're trying to represent. Naturally, a lot will come down to your preferences, so Axis & Allies might be in your comfort zone. And another thing... I suspect that you've hit upon the Horus Heresy because the similarity in force types is similar to Axis & Allies (and many of the other games I've listed). The Horus Heresy works great when you're using the Legions Imperialis minis (which is a great idea). Another Astartes vs. Astartes event that you might consider (though you would need "modern" minis - 3D printing to the rescue) would be the Badab War. Anyhoo, I'll be watching this project with great interest (and I dont' want to hijack it, so please don't take my suggestions as anything other than sparking ideas for you to consider and decide upon).

What a coincidence. I was just researching Axis & Allies earlier this morning. Interestingly enough, I have long had a conceptual project for what I called "Risk 40K," which is along the same lines as what you've described, @Deus_Ex_Machina. My thinking/planning for this project began back in 2000 or so, but has had very little progress because of Hobby Butterfly Syndrome. More recently, as in over the last week or so, I've been thinking about how my idea might work as a reskin or adaptation of Shōgun/Samurai Swords/Ikusa/Ikusa: Samurai Swords, which I love (especially since a 40th edition version of that game is currently on Kickstarter). The original Axis & Allies and Shōgun were both released as part of Milton Bradley's Gamemaster series in the '80s (okay, an edition of Axis & Allies was actually released earlier in that decade by another publisher, but it was the Milton Bradley version that really became popular), along with Fortress America (for which Fantasy Flight Games released an update in 2012). I bought the Samurai Swords version in 1996 and I still have the original/second printing of Fortress America - both are carefully preserved in my garage. The reason I've brought those other games up is because they, too, might serve as the basis for your hypothesized reskin. In addition, it might be worthwhile to look at the various games in the Axis & Allies family to see if those might provide a good basis for your hypothesized reskin. The original Axis & Allies game looked at World War II as a whole whereas the successor games in the series looked at individual parts, giving a little more granularity and better representing individual battles. In addition, these might obviate the need to adapt the naval aspects of Axis & Allies (or the naval aspects might be adapted into spaceborne combat/movement). Another option, and probably a bit more obvious, is to look at the 2010 edition of the Horus Heresy boardgame, which focused on the Siege of Terra. Admittedly, there were some problems with that game in that extreme luck (good or bad) might end the game before things really start off (see some of the discussions at the linked site). More importantly, this game is out of production, though you can still find used copies through various sources. If I'm not mistaken, the rules for all of these games are freely available online. If you decide to move forward with this, I recommend either a blog (if you plan for it to be a largely individual effort) or club (if you plan for it to be a group effort). I think there is a lot of potential with this kind of project.