Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

A few friends and I are thinking of starting up a campaign sometime this year, I was wondering what makes a campaign good. How many people should we include? What point limits should we use in the games? Any suggestions on just about anything to do with a campaign is appreciated.

Good Elements:
A clear theme - people should know what they're fighting for
Responsive to player decisions and game results
Keeps things tight and interesting till the end
A variety of armies and scenarios


Points limits depend partly on table size. If you don't have bigger than 4x4 tables, I wouldn't go above 1000 points.

If players are starting new armies or are new to the game, escalating game sizes are good - starting with a 400 point combat patrol, then 750 point games, 1000, 1500, 1850, 2000.

ive been running a WFB campaign for our local club.
seen here

i like online maps and emails, it makes it easier if someone cant get to the store each week.

here are a few things i would do differently.

1. dont let people be allied, or at least make allies less desireable.we have 2 guys running together and its making it pretty boring on that side of the map.

2. make sure you get the right people to play. dont let casual players in who will wind up quitting next month. our next campaign will have a 5$ entry fee, that way if someone quits we still get his money for prizes

I've been thinking about this myself for some time, but I would also recommend, that you put a Story behind it.
a Map, where you could see the progress of all Players, would be great too. you can put it in your Gamingroom/store, so that other people cann see it too.
Personally, I think it would be pretty cool, if there are equal numbers of "good" and "bad" armys, so that you can have a megabattle at the end, maybe for a huge fortress or something like that. my only Problem with Megabattles is, that there is no reason AT ALL, why Nids or Necros should team-up with anybody. Chaos, Orks or Dark Eldar could always get together for kicking some imperial butt, but how do you talk to bugs or T-800?

Some pointers that might be helpful:

1) Relate battles to one another. This could be as low-key as common locations (Capture Hunter's Farm) and common personalities (The Imperial Governor orders you to defend the palace), or as intrusive upon the game as units wiped out in previous games are unavailable in this one.

2) Keep it simple. Minimise book-keeping. A simple way of simulating the strategic elements of the campaign is to offer each player two (or more) choices, and then cross-reference their answers:
e.g.

Player 1 can choose to:
I) advance to the airfield,
II) send out reconnaissance patrols, 
III) wait for reinforcements.

Player 2 can choose to:
a) Retreat from the airfield,
b) launch a pre-emptive strike
c) fortify their position.

Then you have a key:

Ia: Play a fallback mission, player 2 is the defender.
IIa: Play a combat patrol mission.
IIIa: Play an ambush mission, as player 2's retreating troops discover and attack player 1's advancing reinforcements(!)
Ib: Play a standard alpha mission. Player 2 is allowed only 1 heavy support as his heavy stuff has been evacuated.
IIb: Play a standard omega mission. All but one troops choice come on from reserves. 8 turns.
IIIb: Play a Raid mission, player 1 is defender.
Ic: Play a Raid mission, player 2 is defender; player 2 gets fortifications/minefields.
IIc: Play a standard nightfight Cleanse, player 2 is defender; player 2 gets fortifications/minefields
IIIc: Play a standard mission: both sides get +200 pts to spend.

As you can see, the more choices; the more complicated it gets... Don't feel you have to be utterly fair ? the decisions made in the strategic phase should affect the battlefield ? but don't weight the games too heavily.

Oh, and if you use this method ? EVERY SINGLE OPTION should conclude in a battle ? otherwise it gets really boring really quickly as people stockpile more and more.

3) Make sure games impact on one another. In this case, we'll take 'Ib' as the result ? if player 1 wins, he captures the airfield...

4) ...Bringing us onto my final point ? clear win/lose scenarios. Have a rule: once three/five/all the critical locations are owned by one player, he/she wins. End of campaign. This ends it on a high ? 'If Dave wins this game and captures the Cathedral, the Orks are victorious!' ? which should encourage players to start another campaign... to get even!

Set limits, dont set the entire galaxy as your playing field, keep it to a planet , a city or at the most a singel star system. Denpending on the number of players you have involved. I am involved in a campaign at the moment and I am regreting it. It is geared for...well Im not sure. The army sizes are not set, the game lengths are infinite and the only game played is wipe out the other guy. Its boring as hell, and the 50$ gift certificate a month for the most wins is hardly worth the effort. The map is too big letting, players basiclly avoid one another, there are no set goals and no set point limits. The 2 biggest problems are lack of a story driven background...Its kill or be killed....and the complete lop sidedness of battles. If you own 3 planents you can drop a 3000 point army on a 750 point newbie army and obliterate them for a new planet worth 1000 more points in your army. There was no entry fee thats why I started, but I am quickly losing interest.

I think it woul be very important to have more variaety in the missions, you know bunker attack and stuff like that.
It would be cool, if you get some kind of reward for every win, but you should look out, that it isn't too good