How to WIN with ANY Kill Team in 3rd Edition! | Crit/Tac/Kill Op STRATEGY | Kill Team 3rd Ed Guide

[@LordDarthViadro]

You did mistake while reading crit op 7 sabotage. Each turn you get point for holding center and for holding your home obj if it isnt sabotaged, not enemy obj. So it is easier to score if you can protect your home obj.

[@VentrueMinis]

@@LordDarthViadro great catch!

[@grimebear]

Should we expect an updated Vet Guard video? Your other ones were so helpful! Thank you!

[@VentrueMinis]

Taking a break from Vet Guard as I'm quite sad with the changes to them. But, I'll make one for Scouts soon!

[@christophertaylor3770]

great video dude , thanks for the breakdown

[@HoneyCMB]

This pleases the machine spirits

[@HermitGray]

For wiretap, I can see some plays, like placing it on top of an objective marker, near an operative that can be charged (you either charge and give 2 VP (except against kommandos) or deny it but the operative is safe and could be menacing after), or an access point (door or small passageway) and no visibility needed. For the main missions, I think it's nice to have some variety because each mission force you to adapt to a new strategy and how to counter your opponent (like it or not, but at least it's different ^^) and it gives more ideas for narrative/open/joint missions too

[@VentrueMinis]

Yeah, Wiretap seems like one that in maybe 2-3 months people are going to start having some tech for that I'm excited to see. Seems hard to just pick up and play with right away, but maybe there will be some shenanigans. I'm not super sad about the main missions being as bad as they are because of how even the points are across kill/crit/tac. I was more sad in KT2 1st season where, if you just played a bad mission and weren't playing a very specific team that could break that mission, you lost haha

[@HermitGray]

@@VentrueMinis I think for this new edition, it will be harder to max all VP and have draws (compared to before when maxing everything was relatively easily doable by playing defensively). So now there will be more choice/dilemma between scoring VP and denying VP and how to score with the 3 ways

[@omnissiahGaspar]

With this advice i'll score a perfect score of 21 each game 💪💪

[@BrianW-MGB]

I'm actually looking forward to seeing how some of the 'meh' Crit Ops play out. They're different from Loot, Capture and Secure - and will generate some interesting gameplay!

[@VentrueMinis]

me too! I think it'll be a fun puzzle!

[@Thomas-rw1be]

I'm actually quite optimistic. Because factions are choosing their primary selection instead of faction-specific secondaries, a player's path to victory will ACTUALLY be mission and opponent dependent. Because man, some of the best factions of KT21, and KT18 for that matter, were just the factions that did their one gameplan effectively, ignoring any losses they suffered. This seems to allow for skew in design, as a faction could excel at crit ops by having free mission action and ease of hiding/movement, but by doing so, the enemy can rack up a lot of points on kill and tac ops. Plus, a faction might act in a way that makes their opponent unsure if their primary ops are crit ops or kill ops - think of marines standing on mid-field objectives. Do you trade with them knowing that if you do, you can deny them tac ops, but may be just feeding their kill ops primary instead? To facilitate this, it actually seems like crit ops and tac ops being difficult is the better design. After all, it would be fairly trivial to prevent kill ops points if you could ignore the mission actions. And man, was 5+ objectives boring. 3 objectives with more focus on flying, verticality, & reinforcements can provide a way more interesting game. The problem with interesting maps and missions before was skewed matchups. With this change to victory points, it seems much harder for games to be BOTH choreographed and skewed. But if anybody reads this remembers the fans evolving their own competitive scene with KT18, we know to actually accomplish this goal is quite difficult. Hope this turns out well, and man would I love to see an occasional match where one side totally ignores the crit ops objectives and just moves forward to kill the hated foe for both tac ops and kill ops

[@VentrueMinis]

@@Thomas-rw1be love this!

[@robertchmielecki2580]

I don't disagree, but I am generally a player who likes sacrificing his troops for tactical advantage or victory points. It's just the way I like playing and it applies to any game (war/board/video) in which there are troops I can throw under the bus for the greater good :) I also like playing against players who value lives of their dollies too much and I can exploit this :) So I am personally not happy with the change.

[@VentrueMinis]

@@robertchmielecki2580 as a Vet Guard player, I feel you!

[@Thomas-rw1be]

You a guard player? lol. I definitely find mission objectives necessary for having fun. A hill to die on is way more intriguing than kill points, totally agreed. But I guess I'm not seeing how the change is going to hamstring players into not having that experience. Though I can see how, with this change, we likely will look at a matchup + mission and decide "the best course of action is largely ignoring 2 out of the 3 crit ops objectives & focusing on kill ops and tac ops." Then, because you'd have more fun still choosing crit ops as your primary, knowing that isn't the best course of action would be annoying - and maybe even tactical suicide, if skew is allowed as much as I think it might be. Hm, I think I can see it; though my hope would be that some factions, like guard, won't be able to reliably ignore crit ops, since dying on a hill is sort of their thing lol

[@robertchmielecki2580]

@@Thomas-rw1be No guard, but I used to play LatD in big 40K, O&G in WFB, Cryx and Protectorate in Warmachine and now I play Blooded in KT. I love how Cryx, Protectorate and Blooded actually get bonuses for getting killed :) So I sacrifice a trooper for a tactical advantage and the game even rewards me with a buff :D

[@patrickvondersaar4836]

So actually I think loot is pretty bad this edition since it becomes highly reliant on who gets initiative role since whoever loses initiative role should at best only score one victory point per turning point. So then it becomes a real feels bad when you lose the crit op purely due to RNG

[@DodgethisCZ]

Ah my man! How you enjoy Scions?

[@VentrueMinis]

Haven't played Scions yet! No advance copy, just used the leaks for this video lmao

[@nolader28]

where's the stream you had yesterday?

[@VentrueMinis]

@@nolader28 I don't stream hha

[@theboredlich215]

I disagree with your grade of storm objectives. To me it looks good for aggressive teams and you want primarily score from crit/kill op. Since this just rewards you for just playing the game. Overrun isn't as good if you are playing 2apl team or against elites. Of course all of this is dependant on what you are playing, what the opponent is playing and terrain.

[@hobbithubby5076]

Have 3rd edition rules been released yet?

[@VentrueMinis]

@@hobbithubby5076 sort of! Some KZbinrs have preview copies, there's leaks, there's Warhammer community posts, so it's all out there. Actual rules should be posted in a week or two I think.

[@hobbithubby5076]

@@VentrueMinis keep doing the Lord’s work my man. My local club saw a big boost in KT players after SMII hit so well.