Sporogenesis event seems harsh to auto wound. Could lead to lots of death if you roll a 6 and multiple rolls of 1-2 on affected units. Consider using D3+2 hits instead
good concept, theme could use a bit more reinforcement. I get what you were going for from another comment but almost missed it when reading through it the first time.
one note would be to have more restrictions or clearer directions on objective placement for fair placement. spirit of the rules would have me place objectives fairly but you could give one side massive advantage with some unfair placement (intentional or unintentional).
Consider reformatting to avoid empty column and for ease of reading. It's unclear what game system this is meant for. Growth theme is not well represented.
Granting VPs for destroyed units disadvantages high model count armies from a balance perspective. Destroying a 500pt tank and a 70pt squad gives the same amount of VP.
really like the Forest guardian mechanic. I was worried a full page of rules would be too wordy but very well laid out and easy to understand. This has enough rules to be 2 separate missions or I could pick and chose specific rules depending on what flavour game I wanted to play and still fell like I have a complete mission.
needs more clarification on the “search the wreckage" action. Does this replace any melee or shooting action or happen automatically? Clarification needed on the table size, battlefield sections indicates a 6'x4' table and the diagram is 3' wide.
Interesting concept but needs a lot of tuning. Defending side seems to have all the advantages. The closest objective to the attacking force is 26" away from the closes a regular unit can be deployed (without ambush or scout). Seizing objectives on turns 1 and 2 seem very difficult for the attackers, based on a 12" charge, with diminishing points returns.
granting VPs for destroyed units disadvantages high model count armies from a balance perspective. Destroying a 500pt tank and a 70pt squad gives the same amount of VP.
Page formatting needs some slight tweaks. Consider the objective section starting in it's own column.
consider reworking the VP point awarded for destroying units. As written a 500pt+ tank and a 70pt squad grant the same amount of victory points if destroyed.
the intention is to have a piece of terrain between the two tops of the deployment zone. This is to not have a direct line of fire from the top of the deployment zone to the other and a turn 1 free shot for whoever wins rolls first. Thanks for the feedback, I'll work on making it clearer
Thanks for the feedback. 10 pieces is meant as the minimum amount of pieces , 10+ as in 10 or more. when playtest, since deployment is on the 4' side of the table, units could be outranged rather than hide in cover. Play was more fun and dynamic with less of the terrain. Most of the terrain pieces on hand a probably considered large to medium. I can see a scenario where more terrain would be needed if there are only small terrain pieces on hand.
