|
Post by bob on Jan 22, 2013 15:21:03 GMT -5
Have you read the ME rules? I'm assuming the work like PE.
Get as many games as you can at a given points level. This rewards participation. At each break point, have the points level for games go up.
Have a tournament or apocaplypse-type game at the end.
A "map campaign" a la Jason's masterpiece can't work with the very fluid schedules a group like this will have.
|
|
|
Post by Ben on Jan 22, 2013 16:24:14 GMT -5
Well there are several different ME rules. I read a small rules pamphlet that came with the tiles that I don't like, a long eleborate ruleset that use to be on GW's site that looks really cool but is too complex, and blood in the badlands which I think is best.
I'd prefer map based but you may be right. I'm not sure how we would make it work without any sort of map though..
|
|
|
Post by panther on Jan 22, 2013 19:34:02 GMT -5
i think that if we kept it simple it could work fine kind of like a PE style of simple
|
|
|
Post by panther on Jan 22, 2013 20:33:21 GMT -5
So im almost done with the map I left a couple aries blank incase we have any last minute entries so far the map has Vampire territories, ogre territories, Brettonian territories, warriors of chaos garbage,
So if you are going to jump on the band wagon or hop off of it let me no asap. Im hoping to get it up to at least six people so far we have four common guys two more!
|
|
|
Post by Ben on Jan 22, 2013 20:51:49 GMT -5
Wow Grady you're really moving fast!
Lol warriors of chaos garbage. Guess that's accurate as chaos tends to destroy stuff. I may actually use my beastmen as this would be good motivation to get them painted but whichever army I choose it will be a chaos army.
|
|
|
Post by dante on Jan 22, 2013 22:21:28 GMT -5
Prehaps if the map was just used to measure how well a player is doing? For example who ever is leading this campaign will control the whole map, and instead of invading individual territories the map keeper can just update land % control as rewards to winners. If that makes any sense. Having a map with armies moving all over the place hasn't worked in the past, participation is an issue, having 3-4 battles at a time just pending is an issue. Confusion is an issue.
Basically just use the map to represent who is winning. No armies or board movement. Make it a narrative escalation campaign and you can't go wrong.
|
|
|
Post by bob on Jan 22, 2013 22:30:02 GMT -5
That's how PE works, Dante...two folks get a battle. The areas they control on the map give them bonuses. The winner gets to pick an area from the loser he wants to take over, but it's not definite...random chance.
Complicate map campaigns where army locations and compositions are great in theory, and would work wonderfully with a group of people that had no other commitments, but a group such as our where folks are constantly coming and going and have different interests...it just doesn't work.
Grady, the PE rules (I'm assuming ME is nearly the same) are in the back room with the terrain...they belong to Eric, who I'm sure would not mind at all if you took them for a read.
|
|
|
Post by Ben on Jan 23, 2013 7:13:16 GMT -5
That sounds good to me. Fairly simple.
|
|