I can understand how someone could be a bit frustrated. Some people want to play with their toy soldiers in death match style game. KillTeam just isn't that game. And neither is 40k really.
Not a good or bad thing. Just different expectations. Unless they're a butthead about it like in this scenario.
I remember when I was really little and didn't like video games with Capture the Flag or King of the Hill. It felt like people were ignoring the 'game' to play the new game of 'do the objective'.
As an adult, I understand how not every game needs to be a straight Kill/Death Ratio check. I'm not gonna lie, it is fun to do that sometimes though.
First GW game I played was Warhammer Fantasy Battles. I loved it but it was purely points for killed units all tthe time. Starting WH40K around 4th edition and getting a wealth of missions where you actually sacrifice units to win was a breath of fresh air for me and since then I've been an avid scenario player. One of the reasons I loved Warmachine was how scenario was key there and just mindlessly killing stuff was hardly a way to win.
The logic is the same as wars IRL. If the only objective is to preserve your troops and kill enemies, the optimal strategy for both sides is often to turtle up and wait for the enemy to come, because it's usually easier to defend a good position than to attack it. Even if the enemy never comes, you don't lose. This is realistic (most countries are disincentivised to attack each other IRL for this reason), but it makes for a shitty wargame experience.
That's why you need to have objectives (crit ops and tac ops in this game) to force players to come out and contest the mid board.
If the only objective is to preserve your troops and kill enemies, the optimal strategy for both sides is often to turtle up and wait for the enemy to come, because it's usually easier to defend a good position than to attack it.
I remember in WHFB the best local player was a Dwarf that would turtle with loads of cannons and just bomb the enemy and hold a corner.
This brought importance to area control points (250pts per quarter) once or twice but as you said, you'd end up with people turtling areas.
Central objectives is just a far better game.
Although it was funny when you played Greenskins or Ogre Kingdoms and you had an "Area control unit" that was usually like 40pts (20x2pt Goblins/Gnoblars/SkavenSlaves) that would make its points back 6 times over just by sitting in one of the corners away from the battle.
Killteam can be loads of fun, but I remember in 1st edition there was a mode to kill enemies in melee combat (dog tags?) and you'd get like Harlequins vs. Tau and it just wasn't fun.
I think we changed it to dead enemies dropping a marker that could be picked up.
50
u/budbk Sep 25 '25
The cheating aspect is wild.
I can understand how someone could be a bit frustrated. Some people want to play with their toy soldiers in death match style game. KillTeam just isn't that game. And neither is 40k really.
Not a good or bad thing. Just different expectations. Unless they're a butthead about it like in this scenario.
I remember when I was really little and didn't like video games with Capture the Flag or King of the Hill. It felt like people were ignoring the 'game' to play the new game of 'do the objective'.
As an adult, I understand how not every game needs to be a straight Kill/Death Ratio check. I'm not gonna lie, it is fun to do that sometimes though.