Ultimately a lot of what people are asking for is a new ITC Mission set that is more tactical in nature than the current missions which are definitely more strategic based. They want to use the Secondaries/Primaries to move the meta toward a game that is different, generally, one that is less sit back and shoot, and more tactical in nature around the objectives themselves.
The Seize mechanic is good in certain circumstances, but bad in others, depending on the deployment type used.Players feel the secondaries currently target, or otherwise unfairly go after, specific unit types, list builds, codices etc.Boredom with the current missions, they have effectively been the same for the vast majority of 8th edition.When you comb through the calls for change to the ITC Missions a few patterns are easily discernable around the comments:
With calls for all sorts of things from removing certain secondaries to adding in secondaries to target specific list archetypes and force the meta to punish certain builds over others, to wanting to remove objectives from a game via “burning” them like in Age of Sigmar or the Chapter Approved 2019 Eternal War Missions. There has been a lot of chatter online for days now about what changes should, or should not, be made to the ITC Missions for the 2020 season.
Hello Warhammer 40k aficionados, SaltyJohn from TFG Radio here to talk to you about why Maelstrom cards should be used in the ITC Missions.
0 kommentar(er)
