|
|
 Rank: Minister of Dice Groups: Administration
, Campaigner, Club Member
Joined: 1/22/2009 Posts: 1,225 Location: Ontario
|
Well done to everyone who participated! Below is the list of results for each player who finished the campaign.
| Player |
Generated Power |
Kingdom Value |
Total |
| Colin |
29 |
27 |
56 |
| Mario |
34 |
21 |
55 |
| Mike |
34 |
17 |
51 |
| Phil |
26 |
18 |
44 |
| Jamie |
17 |
20 |
37 |
| Kevin |
3 |
17.5 |
20.5 |
Congratulations to Colin for being the overall winner! I'd also like to congratulate Jamie for having the overall largest Kingdom and for being the only one to conquer and knock out another player.
Feedback
We had a bit of a discussion at the last meeting but to get it all recorded here for future reference, please feel free to provide any feedback on the campaign in this thread. What did you like? What didn't you like? What changes do you think would make it better? Or anything else you want to comment on.
Items I can say are or have been already written into the rules at this point are:
- Table of races to generate a random neutral defender rather than the specific few available in the current rules.
- Realms. Gives the option for a GM to divide the map into realms. Control over complete realms gives players additional bonuses in power and ability to nation-build.
- Naval warfare rules.
You're simply the next meal for my carnosaur.Warhammer Fantasy Army: Tomb Kings, Lizardmen, Dwarfs 40K Army: Tyranids
|
|
 Rank: Minister of Dice Groups: Administration
, Campaigner, Club Member
Joined: 1/22/2009 Posts: 719 Location: Burlington, ON
|
where did realms come from?
Warhammer Fantasy Armies: High Elves, Skaven, Orc & Goblin, Chaos Dwarf
|
|
 Rank: Minister of Dice Groups: Administration
, Campaigner, Club Member
Joined: 1/22/2009 Posts: 1,225 Location: Ontario
|
Me. Adding in things to improve nation-building.
You're simply the next meal for my carnosaur.
Warhammer Fantasy Army: Tomb Kings, Lizardmen, Dwarfs 40K Army: Tyranids
|
|
 Rank: Minister of Dice Groups: Administration
, Campaigner, Club Member
Joined: 1/22/2009 Posts: 719 Location: Burlington, ON
|
ahh
Warhammer Fantasy Armies: High Elves, Skaven, Orc & Goblin, Chaos Dwarf
|
|
 Rank: Minister of Dice Groups: Administration
, Campaigner, Club Member
Joined: 1/22/2009 Posts: 719 Location: Burlington, ON
|
can you please outline the rules as you see them for realms... Just so we can get feedback from everyone on them?
I also wonder how 8th edition will affect the system? Does anyone have any thoughts?
Warhammer Fantasy Armies: High Elves, Skaven, Orc & Goblin, Chaos Dwarf
|
|
 Rank: Minister of Dice Groups: Administration
, Campaigner, Club Member
Joined: 1/22/2009 Posts: 1,225 Location: Ontario
|
Quote:Realms
When designing the campaign map, the GM may decide to include any number of Realms. A realm is a contiguous arrangement of at least 15 hexes. If a player can control all of the hexes in a realm at the end of a campaign he will receive a bonus of power points (Table 1: Calculating effective power, pg 8). When the final hex of a realm is acquired, the player will receive 5 power points for use in the upcoming turn (Table 9: Acquiring Power, pg 21).
Once a realm is secured the player will receive 2 free fortresses that may be placed in any of the border tiles to assist in the defense of his realm (these fortresses may subsequently be upgraded to Mighty Fortresses with a normal expenditure of power, but not on the turn that they are first constructed). This bonus can be claimed only once per realm. This is to symbolize the unified strength that your subjects feel for their home province. If at any time complete control of the realm is lost, the hexes containing these free fortresses are razed (see Table 4: Effects of looting or razing, pg 12).
While a player has complete control of a realm, the restriction on creating towns directly adjacent to the capital is removed. If complete control of the realm is lost the player may no longer create towns directly adjacent to the capital, however any existing towns may remain. You're simply the next meal for my carnosaur.Warhammer Fantasy Army: Tomb Kings, Lizardmen, Dwarfs 40K Army: Tyranids
|
|
 Rank: Minister of Dice Groups: Administration
, Campaigner, Club Member
Joined: 1/22/2009 Posts: 1,225 Location: Ontario
|
TripleDiamonds:...I also wonder how 8th edition will affect the system? Does anyone have any thoughts?
I don't think 8th really has to affect it much. It will certainly change how the actual battles are done but the entitlements system would need to be maintained for campaign purposes.
Since the campaign and 8th both favour core troops they actually should work together quite well for that. The campaign was almost a good run-up to 8th because it had people actually using and thinking about core based armies. You're simply the next meal for my carnosaur.Warhammer Fantasy Army: Tomb Kings, Lizardmen, Dwarfs 40K Army: Tyranids
|
|
 Rank: Minister of Dice Groups: Administration
, Campaigner, Club Member
Joined: 1/22/2009 Posts: 719 Location: Burlington, ON
|
The members of MOD also expressed a desire to have people that are familiar with the play style of a particular army type act as the general of those races neutral armies. We need to figure out how this will work or if it will at all.
In my opinion, I think that the idea is sound and makes a lot of sense in theory. However in practice, I don't think this will work. The main reason is that I can't see the appropriate people being available to play or act as the neutral armies general each week they need to be. So I could see this leading to each turn dragging on about 1 or 2 weeks longer than normal.
Can anyone think of a way around this that makes it more fair?
Warhammer Fantasy Armies: High Elves, Skaven, Orc & Goblin, Chaos Dwarf
|
|
 Rank: Minister of Dice Groups: Administration
, Campaigner, Club Member
Joined: 1/22/2009 Posts: 1,225 Location: Ontario
|
The only thing that comes to mind is the GM will have to look and see who is playing and who isn't, then assign neutral defending armies based on the players available to play them and the armies they can field. It's not exactly random though.
You're simply the next meal for my carnosaur.
Warhammer Fantasy Army: Tomb Kings, Lizardmen, Dwarfs 40K Army: Tyranids
|
|
 Rank: Minister of Dice Groups: Administration
, Campaigner, Club Member
Joined: 1/22/2009 Posts: 719 Location: Burlington, ON
|
yeah.. personally my vote is for a random army type rather than something that the GM picks. Then just have someone that is available play the army. But thats just my vote.
Warhammer Fantasy Armies: High Elves, Skaven, Orc & Goblin, Chaos Dwarf
|
|
Rank: 4+ To Hit Groups: Campaigner
, Club Member, Member
Joined: 1/23/2010 Posts: 86 Location: Oakville
|
A comment on the realms thing. I feel that a minimum size of 15 hexes is a little Large. By turn 10 Jamie with the largest territory only just reached 15 hexes. I feel in order for the realms to actually become a viable thing to strive for they should become smaller (5 to 10 hexes), but have there abilities reduced (less power, 1 fortress etc). At 15 continuous hexes i think the whole realms thing will just become a moot point.
For the the neutral army players. Make the army chosen random and then randomly choose from that weeks available players. This way sometimes you will face an experienced general for that army and sometimes not. I think for the most part everyone has a general sense of how every army should be played (albeit not for 8th edition).
Anyways those are my 2 cents.
|
|
 Rank: Minister of Dice Groups: Administration
, Campaigner, Club Member
Joined: 1/22/2009 Posts: 1,225 Location: Ontario
|
Controlling a realm is supposed to be an achievement in and of itself (hence the bonuses). 15 may indeed be a few too many tiles (I wrote those rules earlier in the campaign, I thought the kingdoms would be larger by the end). I would not go less than 10 tiles however or it is too easily obtainable.
You're simply the next meal for my carnosaur.
Warhammer Fantasy Army: Tomb Kings, Lizardmen, Dwarfs 40K Army: Tyranids
|
|
 Rank: Minister of Dice Groups: Administration
, Campaigner, Club Member
Joined: 1/22/2009 Posts: 719 Location: Burlington, ON
|
Thank you Mario for the feedback.
I agree the size of the realms should be reduced. I think that if we went to say 8 per realm it might make for a different dynamic to the game. The main thing is that the GM or Map Designer would have to ensure that the starting capitals where placed in such a way that no one could get all 4 tiles they have in a single realm to start off with.
does anyone else have any thoughts on the subject?
Warhammer Fantasy Armies: High Elves, Skaven, Orc & Goblin, Chaos Dwarf
|
|
 Rank: 4+ To Hit Groups: Campaigner
, Club Member, Member
Joined: 3/6/2009 Posts: 201 Location: Oakville
|
I like the whole idea of the realms but i agree with brad that they shouldnt be smaller then 10 so it isnt as easy to achieve
WARHAMMER FANTASY - Daemons of chaos / Bretonnia 40K - Blood angels / Tau
|
|
 Rank: Minister of Dice Groups: Administration
, Campaigner, Club Member
Joined: 1/22/2009 Posts: 719 Location: Burlington, ON
|
the only issue that I see.. or I guess the opposite side to that argument is...
if you keep them below 10 turns to get a hold of, it gives someone a chance to take tiles and take away the realm bonus from someone else. in our campaign taht would have only given 1 turn for someone to try and take a tile away from someone if they had control of a total realm.
could all come down to more planning on the mapping stage I guess...
while we are chatting about that... what do you guys think about the size of the map from the last campaign? should it have been bigger or smaller?
Warhammer Fantasy Armies: High Elves, Skaven, Orc & Goblin, Chaos Dwarf
|
|
Rank: 4+ To Hit Groups: Campaigner
, Club Member, Member
Joined: 1/23/2010 Posts: 86 Location: Oakville
|
I'm thinking it should be a tad smaller (for the number of players we had). No real action started until like turn 5 or 6. Maybe instead of minimum of 4 tiles separating capitals maybe have it 3? This way we can have more fights over capitals and what not, and also force more aggression.
On that note, an idea i had was maybe to limit each person to 1 alliance at any one time. This may promote more aggression during the campaign? This is just a random idea i had.
|
|
 Rank: Minister of Dice Groups: Administration
, Campaigner, Club Member
Joined: 1/22/2009 Posts: 719 Location: Burlington, ON
|
I like that idea... A single alliance at any given time...
Warhammer Fantasy Armies: High Elves, Skaven, Orc & Goblin, Chaos Dwarf
|
|
|
Guest |