Page 1 of 3

Getting campaign back on track..

Posted: Fri Jan 04, 2013 5:26 pm
by Rab

Now the silly season is over...If everyone is still up for this...what is the plan for getting this back on track?

We now have an actual board for the map courtesy of James, butI think we need a little more leadership on this, with a central register of who has what ( relics etc ) and who is challenging who etc. and definitely more fluff.


Re: Getting campaign back on track..

Posted: Fri Jan 04, 2013 5:28 pm
by Chilledenuff
As Martin is now back, I'm all for a reboot :shifty:

Re: Getting campaign back on track..

Posted: Fri Jan 04, 2013 5:51 pm
by Rab
I'd happily reboot

Re: Getting campaign back on track..

Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2013 2:13 pm
by Latedave
Im definitely up for kicking this back off again. However, likely to be out of the country a lot with work next year so im going to have to pass the mantle over to someone else for running it (not that i was doing that successfly with other stuff going on but at least we got up and running!:)) can discuss further at agm

Re: Getting campaign back on track..

Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 8:10 am
by Psiclops
I think we all want a campaign this year - but I'm not sure re-starting this one is that great an idea. The main problem with it was that it basically needed us all to be at muppets at the same time once a month to do the campaign moves. I made the map to try to make that easier on the actual day, but I'm not sure it did that/will do that - it is always going to be tough, exponentially so if additional players join in. Ultimately the main function of a campaign should be to give some sense of continuity/larger consequence to games that would otherwise be being played in isolation.

I'll have a think about what we could do - with the main difference being some way to reliably do any campaign moves in absentia or online. I would like to still somehow use the map, but that's just 'cos I spent ages on it - that said, priority should be for a campaign that is easy to run with the focus on the games themselves, and if it doesn't fit then I wouldn't want to use it for the sake of it.
However, what would be nice is if we could bring the current campaign to some sort of conclusion e.g. roll for the effects of the last campaign turn and then do a large multi-player battle from one of the season endings ? Just a suggestion rather than let it petter-out ?

Agreed, we should discuss after the AGM, but thought I'd put this out there now.

Re: Getting campaign back on track..

Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:03 pm
by ianw
What's stopping you doing the moves online / via email? Have you considered using an online dice generator?

Re: Getting campaign back on track..

Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 6:24 pm
by Psiclops
The same thing that is stopping me pulling all of my toenails out with pliers.

Re: Getting campaign back on track..

Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 11:33 am
by Latedave
Well we could do the flying fortress/SoM final game which would be fun if we can find a suitable Sunday. Points wise I think we'd have to limit it to 2000 though otherwise it would be a long session. Or alternatively if thats too complicated have a classic Royal Rumble between the forces of good and evil for final domination of the badlands (probably my preference because its less complicated).

Perhaps some kind of narrative themed campaign would work better instead, if we could balance up three good and three evil then we could track some kind of campaign that way instead. I'm just concious I'm liking to be MIA a lot this year so don't want to hold things up. However, I will definitely be trying to organise games on the tables at my flat.

Re: Getting campaign back on track..

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 6:48 pm
by Psiclops
I have started forming an idea for a campaign that uses a map, and some elements of the Mighty Empires/Badlands but has no rolled for randomness in the move phase. In theory, the moves in this phase could be done as a single e-mail from each player, with the results collated by myself and then updated map states and battles to organise posted up, depending on who went where. I would of course send my moves in to a independant 3rd party before receiving any of the other moves! There would be rules for resolving battles that were unfought due to unavailablity etc. - and also potential for multi-player battles with alliances breaking and forming etc., and default moves made in the event of non-submission of the moves (everything stays where it is, any troops from lost territories move to the city) This would give some resiliance against shortish periods of absenteeism.

The summary is :

The campaign is played out on a fixed 7 hex 'diameter' hexagonal grid. The object of the campaign is to control the centre hex (Citadel ?) at the end of turn 6. Each player (commander) commands a global force (starting at 4000 points), which is added to each turn, with points added to this global force based on how many hexes he currently controls (250 per hex, doubled for cities and mines). Each hex on the grid has a different points limit on it - this gives an upper limit on the size of battle which can be played for control of that hex. These are lower the further out you go, and highest on the centre hex. The commanders start with their entire force in one of 6 cities, symmetrically placed on the map.

Each commander maintains a global list of all of their forces. During each turn, he assigns these forces to each of his territories, including those he is invading (up to 2). Battles are fought based on who enters which territories - shared control of territories is possible, occurring upon draws, equal forces being unable to play the game, and voluntary alliances.

After the turns battles are resolved, each commander gains points for each of the hexes he controls, which must be spent or lost. They can be spent on :
1. Additional forces for the global list.
2. Once per turn, the building a mine or fort on a territory that the commander completely controlled this turn (i.e. before and after the battle phase, and not shared control), which a cost equal to that gained from a single hex (250).

[The theory for this, is that in winning battles you do gain force faster than those who didn't, BUT then to maintain those territories, you have to spread your forces thinner - either gambling on territories not being invaded, or trying to defend against a higher points value force. The territories further out need fewer troops to defend for the gains they give, but you need to control closer in ones in order to assault the citadel. So it allows rewards for victory, but early losses don't cause an penalty in the actual GAMES you play later - it just means you need to focus on lower limit territories in order to gain forces faster ]

It is a work in progress, but it looks OK so far, but before I spend any more time on it, need to check we'd have the interest, as the caveats for this game would be :
1. It probably doesn't work well for anything other than 6 players.
2. There will likely be many multi-player attempts at assaulting the citadel, which would be fun but unlikely to be able to be done satisfactorily on a club night without halving or more the points of those battles.
3. The overall force required for this campaign could go up to 10000+ points near the last turns. You would never actually have to play all of this force (each turn, you assign every unit in your overall force to one of your territories, so that 10,000 could be spread over 6 territories, for example, so being 1666 points on average) due to the restrictions on each hex being low, but something to consider - I'd envisage many units could be repeated and never actually assigned to the same locations. Having said that, I'd like to make it so that each global force can be from ANY NUMBER of Army books, and use the alliance rules from the warhammer book. This will help later on where players are starting new armies etc, and can add an allied force, and means some may be able to make their force very diverse and use a lot of their models.
4. The final battle would almost definitely need to be done outside a club night - It would be a 6000 point a side siege.

Some players have expressed interest, but would be unlikely to be able to do games offline - for them, it would still be possible, as they could not attack the citadel until T6 - but it would be much better if they were able to partake in the final battle. Having said that, spending the campaign rampaging through the outlying villages could be fun in it's own right !

Basically, do we still have the interest of the 6 that were (going to be) playing the last campaign ?

If so, I'll detail further the 'campaign move' part of the game - possibly with an evening of testing the campaign moves themselves using dice rolls to simulate the battles fought to see if it works. 6'd be ideal for that, but 3 (each player controlling 2 forces) would do it for testing viability.

Re: Getting campaign back on track..

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2013 8:49 am
by Chilledenuff
I'm interested, the 2 bit that worry me are:
the alliance bit if you don't have enough toys. It is open to potential abuse, I'm not saying anyone here would but it nags at me.
6000 point a side siege game: that's a lot of toys if all 6 people turn up (36k!) Could also mean a potential 2 day game. I'd never swing a weekend pass! Basically means I'd be making up the numbers as I wouldn't be able to participate in the final match. I don't mind, I'm happy to do so but others may be in the same boat who would much prefer to win at the end