And assuming your opponent isn't fielding multiple VTOL's. ;)

If more than one unit is tied for points, you must select all of them. I take that to mean that if you are using two equally pointed donars, then both must take their turns in the deployment zone.

Exactly. So salvaging one (again, assuming it doesn't get repaired later), will prevent that opponent from meeting the conditions.

Of course, you could certainly use this to divert your opponent's attention by moving your most expensive VTOL to your opponent's deployment zone while playing a completely different mission card.

You guys think you have all the answers, don't you? :p

In every game I play, I go for VC3. On the other side of the board, I attempt to keep my opponent from getting VC3. If I don't get any VC3 points, it is because my opponent stopped me. If my opponent gets VC3 points, it is because I couldn't stop them, or I allow some VC3, intending to get more before the game is over. To win the game (and the tournament), I see no other option but to attempt to win the Victory Conditions. A player who doesn't bother going for VC3 will not win as often as a player who does.
Often I use my biggest VTOL to get VC3, usually it is a transport, but, on occasion, I use a Sprint or a damaged attack VTOL. In my mind, this a perfect secondary use for transports.
In some games (when facing multiple Artillery, for example), I might move every unit into my opponent's deployment zone, as soon as possible. I have never played a game where getting VC3 points was not a part of my strategy. I have never designed a battleforce without giving thought to how I was going to get VC3. On the other hand, I have played many games where I chose not to eliminate my opponent's biggest unit. While high defense fatties are often a consideration, when I design my battle force, they are not a primary consideration because: 1, High defense fatties will not be a factor in every game because some of my opponents won't field one, and, 2, since they raised the battleforce total to 450 (and haven't created a 450 point unit), I don't need to eliminate the high defense fatties I do face to win the game.
I'll admit that I might not be the typical player. Maybe there are many players for whom VC3 is optional. It is also true, that my chosen faction may limit my strategy options somewhat. Maybe, if there were speedy RoTS infantry, I'd use them more often. However, attack VTOLs are not as prevalent as they once were because: set retirement eliminated the Balacs and Assault Orders allowed 'Mechs to move and shoot, nor are they the corner piece of as many battle forces. Given their long attack ranges and new-found disposability, they are ideal candidates for dual strategies, like threatening the back ranks while collecting VC3.
I would never pass up an opportunity to use "Deliver the Payload". As for "Seek and Destroy", I'd think twice before deciding it was the best mission card for me.
I think "Deliver the Payload" is very much like a mission card called "Use Artillery". In both cases, the card is giving an extra VC to the player that accomplishes the current VCs with a specific unit type. "Deliver the Payload" rewards a player for using their biggest VTOL to get VC3, while "Use Artillery" rewards a player for using artillery to get VC1 and/or VC2.
I guess I am objecting to rewarding players for choosing a specific unit type, particularly because I feel the choice is pretty obvious. I think I would like "Deliver the Payload" better if it required you to move the VTOL into the opponent's deployment zone, drop to NOE, and stay for 2 turns without being based by an opposing unit. Then I feel it would be more in line with "Seek and Destroy", since it would require an in-game action that might be a risky choice.

I think Deliver the Payload is more like Successfully Use Artillery where you have to make make two successful arty attacks that actually hit the pogs or two successful arty attacks that damage opposing units.

Now also consider the effects of PCs like Swamp that kills your speed.

Something like Deliver the PAyload is not a sure thing. We don't know what other missions we will have so I think any conclusions drawn at this point will be nothing more than jumping to conclusions.

I've been doing something similar to the Mission Cards for a while in my MArtial Olympics games. Makes for an interesting game.

Cavingjan raises a good point about planetary conditions - Dust Storm will really hinder this mission, since the VTOLs will have to remain at NOE. Storm can cause problems by slowing cruising altitude units to 10" speed, as well.

I'd also point out that AA is another thing that will cause problems for people who run this mission - after all, if everyone in my area was always fielding this mission, it wouldn't take long for me to put AA gear on an assault 'Mech, or field an AA vehicle to deal with those pesky VTOLs.

As for attack VTOLs disappearing with retirement, because of the loss of Balacs - wow. Can I come play at your venue? Nobody around here has played Balacs since the Donar came out... and the Donar isn't retired. I'll also note that the Donar is the most expensive VTOL in the game, so if one is playing "Deliver the Payload" and playing Donars, they don't have much choice but to use the Donar to complete the mission. That would tend to be a bit, obvious, shall we say?

As for using Sprints - Sprints have short dials, and they are fairly cheap - so if you plan on using them to complete the mission, you'd better not be fielding any other VTOLs - or else your Sprint won't count for the mission.

No, you won't know for certain your opponent is fielding the mission, but it doesn't really require anything special to counter - one should already be able to handle VTOLs in any army they build anyway. Plus, if your opponents constantly field that mission, you can easily counter it with PC and equipment selection.

Finally, if you are going after all three VCs yourself, you could basically _ignore_ the fact that your opponent is going for this mission - completing this mission doesn't guarantee that you'll get VC3, after all, and if they complete their mission, that doesn't deny you _any_ VCs for yourself.

Excellent point. ;)

I didn't say that VTOLs had disappeared. I said, "attack VTOLs are not as prevalent as they once were." The reasons I gave were set retirement and assault orders. Do you really want to debate whether there has been a decline in VTOL use as a "corner piece" of the battle force? If you really are seeing tons of Donars in your games, why aren't you knocking them out of the sky like bloated pinatas with assaulting 'Mechs that outrange and outmanuver them?
As for playing at my venue, you are welcome to come play in Olympia, WA at Olympic Cards & Comics anytime you'd like. I believe you will find the players competitive even if they don't always field 3 Donars.
Dust Storm and AA will hinder VTOLs whether or not you use this mission card. The fact that Dust Storm and AA exist apparently hasn't affected the rampant VTOL use in your area, so why would it suddenly affect it when "Deliver the Payload" becomes available?
In any case, doesn't the Donar become retired when this next set, which contains these mission cards, is released?
1. Sure, I can ignore my opponent's attempts to complete their mission. In fact, since it is secret, I don't really have a choice, unless I choose to guess.
2. One of my concerns is that everyone will be using the same missions, because they are significantly better than any other missions. If that happens, what is the point? That doesn't make for an interesting game.
3. Another concern is that if the missions are randomly distributed, it isn't fair to give one player "Deliver the Payload" and the other player "Seek and Destroy". I think "Deliver the Payload" is always much easier to accomplish, particularly because the mission cards are secret.
4. Other than "Successfully use Artillery" or "Give a unit an order", can you think of a mission card that would see more play than "Deliver the Payload"?
5. Regardless of any comparisons, my gut reaction is that "Deliver the Payload" is flawed because there is no risk in attempting completion. You were going to try to move a unit into your opponent's deployment zone, anyway. No significant change in strategy is required to attempt and complete "Deliver the Payload".
6. "Deliver the Payload" allows a Salvage to victory strategy. 1 VTOL and 1 Big Fat 'Mech. Run across the board as fast as possible. Keep the VTOL "able" for 2 turns in your opponent's deployment zone and then Salvage your units or let them be captured. You win 2-1 (VC3 + bonus VC vs. VC2).

I'll admit - I deserved this comment. If I end up in Olympia, WA, I'd be happy to play a game, though I doubt you'd find me to be much in the way of competition, myself ;)

Actually, that was kind of my point - players should be planning on dealing with VTOLs regardless of whether this mission card is in play, or not. Thus, I don't see a big issue with dealing with it.

Nope. WizKids has said a few times that the next round of retirement won't happen until January 2006.

My point about ignoring it, was that it hardly shifts the balance of the game if you're already planning on taking three VCs to win the game. Their "extra VC" doesn't make any difference to your standings - quite unlike if they get VC 1, 2, or 3. The Mission Card VCs are the only ones in which your winning it does _not_ mean that your opponent can't get it.

Well, we've seen one complete mission card, and been given a snippet of a second, and from that, you're assuming that Deliver the Payload will be the only one anyone will want to play. You may want to wait to see the other 6 before coming to that conclusion...
Besides, if everyone was playing it, it wouldn't be long before everyone was playing counters to shoot down the highest point cost VTOL of their opponent's force before it could get into their DZ - that would get them some VC1 points, and a bonus towards gettin VC2, so why not do it anyway?
That said, this mission isn't a guaranteed completion. The restrictions make it so that one does have to keep it in mind during army construction - if you want to use a Sprint or Shun to accomplish the mission, you _can't_ play a Donar. If you're willing to use a Donar, then you're in luck there, except that you'll have to account for the mission in your tactics and strategy when it comes to deciding when to go for their DZ. I can see a lot of people using a Donar for this, but only by waiting until the endgame before going for the opposing DZ. It does make one have to think about it - it isn't something you can just easily get without thinking about it.

Considering the "Deliver the Payload" states, "Your battleforce must contain at least one vehicle with the [VTOL] speed mode", they can't make Mission Cards random. Not everyone plays with VTOLs in every army. Getting that mission when you don't even have a VTOL in the army would make that mission even more difficult to accomplish than "Seek and Destroy."

Without having seen more than one complete Mission Card? We haven't even seen the complete wording on "Seek and Destroy" much less any other mission cards. I'll agree that "Seek and Destroy" is likely to see less use than "Deliver the Payload", but how about the Mission that Kevin Goddard described about keeping a unit alive? If it specifies the highest point cost unit, then that seems like something most players would try to do anyways - after all, losing one's highest point-cost unit, at least when one is playing a 'Mech, generally means one is going to lose the game anyway. So there's another mission many people would do anyway, but would gain them an extra VC.

Well, losing the VTOL because you're placing amidst the heart of your opponent's army would seem to amount to some amount of risk to me, anyway...
One also has to make sure one has an army capable of completing the mission, so while some armies could just drop this mission card in without change, others would need to be re-tooled completely to do this mission.

You're making a big assumption that a player can get their Big Fat 'Mech _and_ their VTOL salvaged without either getting destroyed. Engineer's Salvage to Victory worked because he also went after VC1 in addition to VC3, by making sure he killed more points of units than he lost in ATVs. Interestingly, Mission Cards act as a counter to that: if a player followed the "Salvage to Win" strategy, they still might not win, since their opponent may have played a Mission Card, thus making the final result, at best, 2-2, with their opponent having gotten VC2, thus winning the tie breaker. In the case of the 'Mech and VTOL "Salvage to Win" army, if their opponent destroys the VTOL instead of just salvaging it (a fairly likely possibility), then the "salvage to victory" strategy fails entirely, since both VC1 and VC2 will have been won by the other player, guaranteeing them the win.

A couple things. Donars will still be around until January of next year (or whenever the first set of the new year is tourney legal.) So we will still be dealing with all of the units currently available.
Believe it or not, I think Deliver the PAyload will actually reduce the use of attack vtols or at least paired attack vtols. You would not want to play two identical costing vtols if they are your most expensive vehicle vtol on the field as you will need to get not one both all of those vtols in your opponent's deployment zone for two turns.Once one it destroyed or salvaged, your mission is no longer possible to complete.
Beyond this, I will wait until we see more of these missions to make more comments. Next time I make it out to the PacNW, I will certainly drop by the venue to play. And I will bring along my best army that I can make out of my trade bait.

Also consider, if seanwalsh gets a reputations for always using this mission card (after all, he says he doesn't see any reason he wouldn't use it as much of possible), his regular opponent's will likely recognize this and their tactics will revolve around this (which is his most expensive VTOL?).

Of course, if we see something like the domain rules, players won't be able to focus on a single mission card for an entire tournament.

Does MK have something like this, David? If so, how does it work there?

Okay, maybe I'm jumping the gun, but if "Keeping a unit alive" is one of the other mission cards, I don't know what I'll do. That idea is even worse than "Deliver the Payload"!
- Gosh, I was going to try and get my 'Mech killed, but since I have this special mission card, I guess I will try and keep him alive this time.
I guess I just don't like the idea of mission cards that are double dipping. Why give an extra bonus to a player for doing something they were going to do anyway?
Under the current rules there are 3 VCs, and the strategies for getting them are different. Although VC1 and VC2 can both be acheived by attacking opposing units, VC2 is better served by leaving the units in Salvage or capturing, which is directly counter to any strategy to get VC1. Getting VC3 requires getting into the deployment zone which is almost never the best way to get VC1 or VC2, because you are either moving a unit away from the fighting to sit by itself or into the enemy stronghold to sit nervously there.
I like the fact that the VCs are balanced and the differing strategic choices are in conflict. If you try to hard for just 1 VC, you can still lose. That is my favorite part of 'Mech Warrior. In my opinion, that tension is one of the things that make this game great. The Rock, Paper, Scissors balance of units is the other.
Mission cards which give an extra VC for actions which you would take ordinarily disrupt that balance and weaken the game.
To get off one soap box and onto another, Salvage to Victory is just bad. I think any game mechanic which enables such a strategy is badly designed. That the Bounty Hunter (or, preferably, a hitherto unforseen bigger 'Mech), the SC Donar, the SC Pride and "Deliver the Payload" allow a viable strategy of pushing across the board and trying to get captured just bothers me.

@DBlizzard,
It is unlikely I'll use "Deliver the Payload" much. I don't like using the easy or obvious strategies. I don't like to use Artillery or tank drop, for example, and I have fielded Ezekial Crow in competitive play.

@cavingjan,
I agree this mission card might reduce VTOL use, but I don't think VTOLs are overused now that 'Mechs can have AA gear, assault orders and 11-12 attacks.

Nope. Completely new to Mechwarrior.

We'll know how WizKids is going to handle it in tournaments when we see the tournament rules. I've just heard speculation.

Depends on what the unit is. On numerous times I've sacrificed units in order to get other units in position. If it's one of those units you need to keep alive, then you're limiting your options by playing and trying this mission card.

For the record, here is the text from the Firepower article in Game Trade Magazine dealing with missions:

Which is it?