use the blog engine on the front page. much neater for following the action.

_________________
My shifting projects

A sub-forum here would probably get more eyes and involvement and be easier for new members to find.

_________________
AFK with real life, still checking PMs

Might be easier just to paste in the basic mechanics of the campaign im runnign now.

A reported win provides 4CP, a draw 3CP and a loss 2CP. Each region requires a certain amount of CP to capture - how much depends on what terrain type and how big the region is. So a large city in the mountains might need 16CP to capture, while a small village on plains may only need 3CP.

Once each factions reports are totalled for each region they are compared to how much is needed to capture the region and if they have enough then the faction captures the region. If two factions attack the same region then their totals are compared and subtracted from each other - if the winner has enough to capture the region after thier opponents have been subtracted then they capture the region.

_________________
My EPIC and BFG Blog: https://epicaddiction.wordpress.com/

I agree. However, when the news section is up and running we could certainly showcase key events there.

_________________
https://www.cybershadow.ninja - A brief look into my twisted world, including wargames and beyond.
https://www.net-armageddon.org - The official NetEA (Epic Armageddon) site and resource.

That sounds like a good system. I was, however, intending to include some sort of system to factor out the unequal representation of armies, rather than a points for wins score (at the moment 50 games with space marines who loose 90% of them will give more points than 4 chaos marine players who win all their 4 games). Thats why I suggested certain points of progression where a simple wins/games played ratio is worked out.

True, however the mechanics can cope with that.

Players do not necessarily have to be playing the same army as they are roleplaying in the campaign.
Also you can introduce a faction size modifier to even out uneven faction sizes - a faction half the size of the biggest gets its reporting power doubled etc

_________________
My EPIC and BFG Blog: https://epicaddiction.wordpress.com/

Do you think its worth putting up a vote thread to see what armeis people who are interested in playing would likely use, to get a basic idea of the proportions?


EDIT: I've done one, do you think it may help?

viewtopic.php?f=88&t=23218

We could always lock sign up to a faction if one was much larger than the others?

_________________
My EPIC and BFG Blog: https://epicaddiction.wordpress.com/

That's a good idea, I'm sure most people actually have more than one army so that shouldn't exclude anyone.

While I do agree that you need active involvement from forum members, I think that could be sporadic, and the delays potentially damaging to the impetus you will need initially. This is one of the reasons why I suggested the use of tournament results as well as games posted in the reports section; I think you should try to be as independent of other people as possible while welcoming any input that is provided.

So, my recommendation would be to try to keep the narrative moving on a timed basis as much as possible, providing regular invitations for input, while having an alternative resource should that input fail to materialise. For example

1. Start with your initial idea of a (relatively) limited number of factions, present the overall scenario of the campaign (ie the scope), some conceptual type of map etc.
2. Post up the initial narrative that provides the starting point of the campaign (as you suggested), which results in the initial clashes between factions.
   Eg
   • The emperor has decided to quell rebellion in the 'alpha' quadrant,
   • Orks have invaded the 'Beta' quadrant and the emperor has reponded by sending in the Marines.
   • The Eldar have decided to re-capture the 'Gamma quadrant from the Orks.
   • The Eldar are hatching plans to invade other (unspecified) quadrant(s)
3. Now you give people a specified time to fight the given battles, ideally 1-2 weeks and preferably no more than 1 month in order to maintain the impetus.
   People are encouraged to post army details, results etc. If possible they might also present some detail relative to the narrative at that point. (These details will be posted in the Battle results section of the forum with links etc).
   Now you need to consider how the results are to be used:-
   • Where two or more contributions are provided, you will need to provide some mechanic to combine them
   • If no-one posts for a desired battle, use some other representative battle from a recent tournament, or at worst, throw a dice.
4. Once the specified time period is closed, you write up the results in the narrative, using novemberrain's results mechanic or some such to decide the progress. The Campaign map is amended etc and the campaign moves foward to the next point where you need input.

The key to all this is the frequency and regularity of posting to the narrative. Think of it like a regular column in a newspaper or periodical; it will need to be governed by tight management of the progress and time-boxing the input from the forum, hence why you will need to have plans for any of the possible outcomes from no input at all, to being overwhelmed by forum members.

You will also want to allow for other variations, and here it is crucial to be flexible and sensitive to the moods in the forum (as well as wider sources) while also allowing for the unexpected. For example

• You might want to 'telegraph' privately to some willing assistants about a particularly large engagement to allow them to plan and post a 'mega' battle in all it's glory;
• Possibly someone has started up their own mini-campaign that you want to include.
• Variations in the sub-types of the factions that are current at a given point in time (Cadians, Black Templars, Ulthwe, Thousand Sons etc)
• The arrival of new factions in the campaign (Tyranids, Tau) or departure of existing ones (Eldar move away - no input of any kind) etc

It tends to be run so that each player can submit 1 or 2 battles each turn and turns tend to last a week, and after each turn the results are worked into the next "chapter" of the campaign narrative

_________________
My EPIC and BFG Blog: https://epicaddiction.wordpress.com/

Sounds like a great project for the community – I hope it reinvigorates some peoples' enthusiasm

Regarding the gaming mechanics, I'll leave that to older heads, but you might make a note that these games would be perfect for helping playtest and give something back to the community.

Background-wise, and as something a bit different, have you considered setting it during the
Nova Terra Interregnum?

This was a period where the Ur-Council of Nova Terra rejected the authority of the High Lords and declared the Segmentum Pacificus a separate domain from the remainder of the Imperium.

It would provide a great way to pitch Imperial forces against one another (judging from the sign-up thread, Imperials are the largest faction), as well as explaining the variety of other species and factions involved – resurgent xenos, heretics and mercenaries taking advantage of the conflict. It also gives a great sense of scale – you can have whole systems falling or being recaptured, and regardless of the result (e.g. does the Segmentum Pacificus grow or shrink), it makes no huge difference to the current state of 40k (since the Ur-Council was eventually overthrown and the Segmentum reabsorbed).

_________________
Industrious, red-robe wearing member of the PCRC

Ok, I have a proposal.

To get things up and running and test the water, I run a simple mini campaign as a tester, with a few people giving me a hand.

I think for the sake of simplicity and as this has not been done for a while I may do a simple, short campaign, run over a couple of months, tree based, rather than map based (although with a map for illustration). Where the direction the storyline goes at each predetermined will be determined by a simple win/loss ratio of games that had been submitted by date. Results can be submitted by poll to automate the data collection.

I know this does not have the detail of a map based campaign where the story is created by the games, nor the scope of a campaign set across the whole imperium at a point in the 40k history, but for the sake of a dry run to get mechanisms sorted it may be a good start.

If this works ok, we could then run something more complex over the sumer holidays, with a larger team of organisers running complex maps etc.

Fair enough for now?
People ok if I, as a forum noob, set this one up?
Anyone willing to lend a hand with the running (not that it should take much), especially to be backup if OFSTEAD turn up and I have to disappear for a few days? (especially a forum moderator)
Anyone wanting to put themselves forward for a larger summer bonanza?

I'd be happy to help out in someway if needed, but have no experience with campaigns. Also won't be able to contribute any battle reprots myself until the summer.

_________________
AFK with real life, still checking PMs

Im happy to help out with any bigger future campaign. Have run online campaigns of up to 50 players before.

_________________
My EPIC and BFG Blog: https://epicaddiction.wordpress.com/