Belegarth

Everyone,

I've been working on a Great War campaign that I'd like to try during Spring War. I'm definitely open to any suggestions to make this interesting and fun. One thing I've tried is to do is make the battle scenarios terrain or mission-based. To add the "fog of war", both sides will not see the opposing units until they "bump" into each other. In addition, I'll also be adding in a random element by using playing cards (see below). The gist of the campaign is that there will be two sides vying for control of a map broken down into hexes. There are 5 strategic hexes on the map and a side wins by holding 4 of the 5 points for one turn. The sides will move their individual teams on the campaign map to attempt to secure the strategic points. When the sides meet on a common hex, they will fight to determine who controls that hex.

Here's what I have so far:

Objective
-To seize and hold 4 out of the five strategic points on the hex map for one turn.
-Winner of campaign determined by success or failure on the battlefield.
-Opportunity for realms to fight together.

Roles
Strategist
-Strategist determines movement of units on the campaign map
-May fight in battles
-May divide their side into a max of 5 teams. A team must consist of a minimum of one realm. A realm cannot be subdivided amongst several teams. Note: There is no way to win the campaign without dividing a side into several teams. The strategists move the teams on the hex map.
War Commander
-Leads units in battle
-Cannot be the same person as the strategist.
Realm battle leaders
-Designated realm tactical leader
-Determined by realm.
Nomads
-Nomads-Wolfpack fighters-designated with white headbands
-No affiliation
-Will attack both sides and will NOT ally.
-Random encounters-Core realm leaders will draw cards to determine if nomads will appear.
-If the nomads should win an encounter, then neither side can occupy that hex during that turn.

Turns and actions
-Turns are used to make sure that the strategists are making their moves at the same time and so the marshal can actively track the movements of each side.
-Once the game begins, the strategists will move their teams on the campaign map.
-A turn consists of up to 4 actions. A Strategist does not have to use all four actions during a turn.
-An action is defined as moving one team one hex on the campaign map. Additional rules regarding actions are in the next section.

Teams and Groups
-Once the core realms have been determined, the remaining realms will be divided by size. The core realms would then pick realms with the intent that the numbers on each side being essentially the same. However, the Strategist and War Leaders will not know which realm is which, only the number of fighters.
-The Strategists and War Leaders would then divide their realms into no more than 5 teams. A team must be composed of at least one realm. No realm may be divided amongst several teams. The teams will also be represented by markers on the campaign map.
-Once the realms have been divided into teams, they may not be moved to other teams during the campaign.
-Teams may be formed into larger groups. However,
--All teams that will be formed into the group must be on the same hex.
--A Strategist expends the corresponding number of actions to join the teams into a group. For example, if two teams will be formed into a group, then two actions are needed. If three teams will form a group, then three actions would be used.
--The same number of actions would be required to split a group back into its individual teams.
--A group composed of two teams would take two actions to move one hex. A group composed of three teams would take three actions to move one hex.

General Notes
-All organization will be done on the realm level.
-Realm meat grinder will determine the two core realms?last two realms remaining
-Core realms will randomly pick realms via playing cards.
-All realms will designate a realm battle leader.
-Interactions between the War Commander and supporting realms should be via realm battle leaders.
-Each side will be differentiated via red and blue headbands.
-Marshals may rebalance sides as needed.
-All battles will be fought best two out of three. Winner occupies hex. Loser must move back to one of the adjacent hexes.
-If a team has not moved or moves into a hex before the other team occupies it, then it will automatically be the defender.
-If both teams land on a hex at the same time, then they will draw cards to determine attacker and defender status.
-Reinforcements
--In fighting for a hex, the teams that are currently in the hex begin fighting.
--To simulate reinforcements, teams in other hexes will be able to join in after a certain time period.
--The time period will be based on how many hexes away the team is from the hex in conflict.

Double-blind format.
-Each side will move their teams without knowing what the other team is doing.
-Marshal will have duplicate map to track when opposing teams land in the same hex.

Battle types
-Swamp
--Missiles not reusable
--No running (trudging through the mud)

-Plains-normal field battle

-Caravan
--One side will be tasked with safely escorting supplies along designated route.
--Other side will ambush the convoy at any point along route.

-Mountain top
--No missiles due to high winds
--One team starts in the center. Other surrounds.

-Crossroads (chaos bridge battle)
--Defenders guard all roads
--Attackers may engage using any or all roads.

-River/bridge crossing
--Three bridges going across a river
--Unarmored fighters may wade or swim across river
--Fighters with extremity armor may cross river
--Head and/or torso armor cannot cross river. Must use bridge.
--Swimming underwater=crawling on hands and knees: immune to missiles
--Walking on knees=wading through water: not immune to missiles

-Beach assault
--Objective: Both sides start on opposite sides of the field. Attackers must carry a flag past the defenders? starting line. There will be a line designating the shore and also the shore emplacements (archers). The shore emplacements will situated halfway between the shore and the defenders' starting line.
--Attackers? transport cannot reach the beach due to shallows. Must use small boats to reach the shoreline and attempt to establish beachhead.
--PVC boats
---One hand of each rower to hold boat (row) and other to hold shield. Max of 6 passengers-10 total per boat.
---Max of four rowers. If there are 4 rowers, boat crew may run. If less than 4, than boat can only walk.
---Boats will have tarps hanging down to simulate waterline. Shots to the tarps do not count. The boat will never be held above waist-level.
-Defenders cannot melee engage until beachhead established; however defenders may engage with missile weapons once boats are in range of the shore emplacements.
-Once the first wave of boats has landed and dropped off its passengers, defenders can move past their starting line and engage.

-Town siege (if available)-similar to what we did at Octoberfest.

-Castle siege (if available)-self-explanatory

Kyrian

I love it Kyrian. Very well thought out. I'd gladly support and participate.

A closer look reveals my question is a small deal.

about the head bands, will people be bringing their own or do you plan to supply? because if the combatants have to bring there own they will have to know which side there on, or bring one of each color. then again if you know how many to expect that swould be as large an issue.
otherwise... supportit wholeheartedly

The headbands will be provided. Also, I plan on having battlefield banners made up so that people will know to which team they belong. Check out the first post...I've added in some info regarding turns and movement on the campaign map.

Kyrian

Sounds awesomer than awesome!

So, would the actual playing have the strategists move the their teams around on a map for a turn, and then the fighters would fight out the result and then a new turn? The result being that whole thing would still happen on one field with different configurations of fighters.

Turin,

That's essentially it. Winning the battles will win the campaign. Once the outcome of a battle has been determined, the strategists will make their moves on the campaign map and the sides will go to the next battle. I'm still trying to work through how to make it so that the fighters aren't standing around waiting for the next battle and how to communicate to the individual teams as to when they can enter the battlefield. I really want to have a smooth transition between the different battles. What I'm thinking I might do is have designated starting lines for both sides and then have the marshals announce when each team can enter the battlefield (See notes about reinforcements).

I've also been thinking that it might not be the best thing for the strategist to be fighting in the battles. There would be the potential travel time as the strategist makes his/her way back to the campaign map. If the strategists stay near the map, they can immediately start planning for their next actions/turns once the battle's outcome has been determined.

Kyrian

P.S. Fowler, what was your question? With something of this scale, I need to hear any questions or concerns people might have. Your question may lead to other things I hadn't thought of...

P.P.S. What's everyone's opinion of doing best two out of three for all the battles? I know it makes it more fair but it may also drag out some of the battles and get boring. If we do a single fight for each battle, things should go quickly.

I really like this idea kyrian. If you die would you be out for the rest of the game?

Thantan,

No, you would only be out for the remainder of that fight. Once the conditions /mission for the next battle have been determined, you would be able to participate in that one. The only thing that may happen is that your team might be delayed from actually entering the battle depending on how many hexes it is from the teams in the contested hex. I haven't quite figured out what kind of time delay I'll use but it might be something like 10-20 seconds per hex or I may just leave it to marshal's discretion.

Kyrian

Well, perhaps you should figure out a method that determines certain leadership positions for both sides.

Fowler,

That's a good question. I had assumed that it would be people determined by the core realms. One of the things I had planned was to hold the realm meat grinder for the Great War on Friday and have the Great War on Saturday. That way, the core realms would have some time to decide how they want to go about things and to decide on their strategist, war leader, and realm battle leader.

Kyrian

I guess I have less trust in people picking a leader in a timely fashion.

honestly I'm a little confused because I only read the first half of Kyrians post. I liked it, and if its possible for someone to just tell me when to go in and kill someone without ruining the game, then I'm all for it.

I think that Bodhi, ironically, brings up a very relevant question: How do you explain the good bits to the people who just want to fight?

Turin and Bodhi,

This is the way I was envisioning it:

1) I will have copies of the Great War rules available at Troll. The rules for the different battle scenarios will also be explained in detail.
2) Core realms are determined on Friday and announced to all realms present.
3) Core realms would immediately pick which realms would be fighting on their respective sides.
4) During Friday and Saturday, the War Leaders and Strategists would decide which realms would be on what teams. For simplicity, I'll probably just have them designate the teams as "Team 1", "Team 2", etc.
5) Before the Great War battles begin, The realms will receive their team assignments.
6) The marshals will announce the battle scenario and the specific rules. As the battle progresses, they will hold up placards indicating when a team can enter the battlefield.

So, in a nutshell, if you're not holding one of the key Great war positions, you would listen for the marshall to announce the what type of battle it will be and then you would wait for your team number to come up. Then you can enter the battle.

I hope that makes sense...I was kinda thinking this off-the-cuff.

Kyrian

yeah, sounds excellent. So Im going to assume that with the basis on realm division, units will inevitabley mean nothing then? Also kyrian, since you kinda have an idea of how each days fighting is going to be planned out, the monster breatheren would also like an hour for a Monsters vs. non-M. If an hour seems to long then it can obviously be shortened. But just so ya know, thats something that a lot of us would like to do also.

We should definatly do some Monsters vs. field battles.

Bodhi,

Since the theme of "Unit Wars" has already been done, we've decided to run Spring War as a realm-centric event. We'll have a few unit battles and monster battles but we wanted to focus on realms since we really haven't done too much with that in the past.

Kyrian

awesome, something new is always good.

Kyrian wrote:Bodhi,

Since the theme of "Unit Wars" has already been done, we've decided to run Spring War as a realm-centric event. We'll have a few unit battles and monster battles but we wanted to focus on realms since we really haven't done too much with that in the past.

Kyrian

Will those of us with small realms be able to combind with other realms.

Peregrine,

Once we've determined the two core realms, the rest of the realms will be divided by size. Then the core realms would randomly pick the realms for their sides. The idea is to have roughly similar numbers of people on both sides.

Kyrian

Sounds cool.

Isengard in Villa Grove, IL is a new realm and will bring maybe 5 oldtimers, 4 vets, and 4-8 inexperienced fighters. Will consideration be placed on proximity of a realm's home when building multi-realm team? The oldtimers and vets started out fighting with Numenor. Realm members often field trip to Numenor and Khazad-Dum and visa-versa. Our members are mostly Dark Guard and Uruk-Hai. I guess what I am saying since I figure Numenor and Wolfpack will be the core realms, I would rather fight with my old home realm Numenor.-Nix

Since Wolfpack is running the event, we're probably not going to be able to field that many fighters during the day. Because of that, I plan on utilizing Wolfpack as nomads, basically fighters whose sole mission is to try to kill everyone regardless of side...(Everyone's creeping on our grazing lands--the campaign map--and we're not too happy about that)...

As far as which realms go with which sides, it's going to be random. The realms will be broken down by size and the strategists and war leaders will pick the realms to have similar numbers. I'll have the realm names written face down on playing cards with the cards separated by small, medium, and large realms. The realms would then be picked by drawing cards.

I am planning on having some Wars between the States as some of the battles on Saturday so the different states should have some opportunities to fight together.

Kyrian

This sounds wonderful Kyrian. Have you thought about send a word out to realm leaders ahead of time as well as posting this idea for everyone else to see.

I know it would a pain to put together before hand, and maybe having the realm leaders onboard before hand might be good for pre-organization...

Other than that, lets do this.

Something to remember is that only the leadership of each side know all the rules for the tactical part. The rest of the fighters (the lowly soldiers) will only need to know the standard Belegarth rules and a couple special rules on a per fight basis. This fact should keep things smooth, as those of us fighting in the trenches will not care much for the thoughts and rules followed by "Gods & Generals".

I've been focusing lately on trying to "bulletproof" the rules set and I'd like to hear people's thoughts on the following items.

This is my perspective on how I'd like things to go:
a) I want to make the campaign as seamless as possible with no one standing around waiting for something to happen.
b) Everyone should have an opportunity to fight in every battle.
c) I want to keep the complexity down to just enough to keep it interesting but not enough to get bogged down or confusing.

1) Can anyone think of a way to prevent the sides from waiting around until all of the teams can enter the field? Should there be? If you recall, the other teams would be sent in as reinforcements on a timed basis depending on how close they are to the contested hex.

2) Best 2 out of 3 for the battles or just one? Best 2 out of 3 would slow down the campaign considerably but would probably be a better indication of which side was the winner. Having just one battle per hex would speed up the game considerably but there's more potential for grumblings regarding who won. Scenarios that are pretty involved such as the beach assault could really drag if it has to be done three times in a row.

3) Should the strategist actually participate in the fighting? I was contemplating allowing the War Leader and Strategist to be able to switch out if they should want to but I'm concerned about how much it would slow things down. I know it would be slow if the Strategist had to make moves on the map and then go out to fight and then return to the campaign map. If the Strategist doesn't fight, then he or she can stay by the campaign map and be ready to plan for the next battle once the outcome for the current battle has been determined.

4) What do you think about posting about a month out with the rules and asking all the realms that want to participate to think about who their potential War Leaders/Strategists might be?

5) Can a team consist of only one realm? Is there any way to prevent this? I really didn't want to see a side organized so that there are four teams consisting of one realm each with the last team having the remainder of the realms. I see this as a potential issue because there's the possibility that a battle could be over before one or more teams has a chance to enter the battle. This ties in with question #1.

6) Can anyone think of any other potential loopholes in the rules?

Thanks for your help,

Kyrian

I assume the tacticians are going to be removed from the conflict and will get to see a map and be given news by the herald who will have a radio to communicate with the field heralds?


Maybe you could make the hex map that combat is imagined to take place on. This might help solidify the idea.

Take a look at Risk or Axis and Allies for possible help?

Okay, let me see if I can pipe in...

1. I am having difficulty understanding the idea of teams. The way the
two core sides are divided is as follows.

Two realms are randomly? selected to be the core realms for
the respective sides. Then each core realm will go about selecting
other realms (which may or may not be divided) to be part of their
team. (The idea in the end is to have even sides.)

Example: It is possible for example for Arnor to lead one side, and
Dunharrow to lead another, then Numenor is broken up and divided
among them if chosen. Did I interpret correctly?

2. I think that best two out of three can work. While it may take a little
time to reset in some instances, it overall shouldn't be a problem.
The only thing I see arising is issues with water breaks. When do you
have them. Maybe the battles should be planned so that a segment
of the war ends in a long battle, after which there is a water break???

3. In this instance, it seems like the Strategist would be ordering the War
Leader to their objective. I would say that should the war leader fall,
then the strategist could then enter battles. That could be the cost of
losing their battle commander. since the strategist would need to take
more time to plan ahead. (Sorta doing it on the fly.)

4. Definately post the rules the second you feel they are sound. I
remember when the rules for the invasion of Numenor came out
2 spring wars ago. They get people really interested and wanting to
know whats going down. furthermore, if they come knowing, then
there should be less fuss.

5. See my first question. Is this going to be a grand mix of realms. I
know that we get a kick and love to practice as a realm, and that
events are the only places to do that. With that in mind, you should
maybe leave it to the realm leaders ahead of time to secure their
allies. Then set a deadline like an hour before the event to present
their armies to you (the heralds) Then if necessary you can juggle
the teams, or employ wolfpack accordingly???

6. Not at the moment, but I'm really foggy on the teams thing.

This is why I wanted to get into Belegarth.

The rules seem to be very close to being sound.

Comments

DO NOT do best 2 out of 3. Unless you are sure the scenarios will go fast or the hex map is not all that large, otherwise there will not be that much variety.

Resolve each battle caused on the hex map seperately. This would allow for spectating and enhance the value of each fight. If you didnt do best two out of three, then the battles would most likely not last long enough to make fighters restless.

This campaign looks so cool. Keep grinding at it.

Borric,

>>1. I am having difficulty understanding the idea of teams. The way the
two core sides are divided is as follows.

>>Two realms are randomly? selected to be the core realms for
the respective sides. Then each core realm will go about selecting
other realms (which may or may not be divided) to be part of their
team. (The idea in the end is to have even sides.)

I just realized that I didn?t really explain the team concept in the rules as clearly as I should have. I?ll edit the rules up top to add them in. A team must be composed of at least one realm. The team will be represented by a team banner and would have a corresponding marker on the campaign map. The Strategist and War Leader would determine how the realms would be distributed amongst the teams. For example, Team I might be composed of Arnor and Dun Abhon, Team II might have Tir Asleen and Nan Belegorn, Team III might be Numenor with Dur-Demarion, and Team IV might have Dunharrow, Loderia, and Khazad-dum. Teams will be moved on the campaign map until teams from each side land on a same hex. When this happens, there will be a battle to determine who controls the hex and who gets driven back. I just realized how critical the layout of the map will be. If it?s not done quite right, then there?s the possibility of having the same battles over and over as the sides try to gain control of the strategic points. Teams may be grouped together but joined teams take additional actions to move on the map. A group composed of two teams would take two actions (remember there are four actions per turn) to move one hex. A group composed of three teams would take three actions to move one hex. To group teams, all the teams must be on the same hex and it takes the same number of actions as there are teams to group them together, i.e., if there are two teams, then it takes two actions to group them together.

>>Example: It is possible for example for Arnor to lead one side, and
Dunharrow to lead another, then Numenor is broken up and divided
among them if chosen. Did I interpret correctly?

Not quite. The idea is that a realm would never be subdivided during the campaign. Once it?s assigned to a side and a team, it would stay there unless the marshal determined that realms would have to be shifted in order to balance the numbers. If one side gets a very large realm, then the other side would be able to pick a number of smaller realms or an equivalently-sized large realm to equalize the numbers. This is my concern that a side may choose to have one very large-sized team while making the other teams a single small realm. I envision this as a problem because then a team may not have an opportunity to participate in all the battles as the battle may already be resolved before it?s their turn to enter.

>>2. I think that best two out of three can work. While it may take a little
time to reset in some instances, it overall shouldn't be a problem.
The only thing I see arising is issues with water breaks. When do you
have them. Maybe the battles should be planned so that a segment
of the war ends in a long battle, after which there is a water break???

Right now, I?m leaning more towards each battle being done once to determine control of a hex. This would be done to make the campaign go faster and provide a greater opportunity to do different battles. I?m still wary of having to run certain battles three times in a row. I would probably do water breaks more on a time basis rather than after certain battles, say every 15-20 minutes depending on the temperature.

>>3. In this instance, it seems like the Strategist would be ordering the War Leader to their objective. I would say that should the war leader fall,
then the strategist could then enter battles. That could be the cost of
losing their battle commander. since the strategist would need to take
more time to plan ahead. (Sorta doing it on the fly.)

That?s an interesting idea?definitely something to consider. As I mentioned, having the Strategists participate in the battle means that we would have to wait until they made it back to the campaign map before they could plan their next moves. What if the Strategist dies on the far end of the field or has to retrieve several arrows? Then they would still have to go and plan their turns. This would mean fighters waiting for something to happen which is what I don?t want. If the Strategists stayed by the map, they could immediately plan once a battle has been resolved.

>>4. Definately post the rules the second you feel they are sound. I
remember when the rules for the invasion of Numenor came out
2 spring wars ago. They get people really interested and wanting to
know whats going down. furthermore, if they come knowing, then
there should be less fuss.

Good point. I?ll post them online once I have a solid final draft. Then, at Troll, I?ll have copies of the Great War campaign rules available. The rules at Troll would be the final version.

>>5. See my first question. Is this going to be a grand mix of realms. I
know that we get a kick and love to practice as a realm, and that
events are the only places to do that. With that in mind, you should
maybe leave it to the realm leaders ahead of time to secure their
allies. Then set a deadline like an hour before the event to present
their armies to you (the heralds) Then if necessary you can juggle
the teams, or employ wolfpack accordingly???

I?m not completely sure I understand what you mean by ?secure their allies.? To be honest, I?ve never seen securing allies for campaigns like these as a positive thing. It would inevitably end up with one side having more resources, money, beer, etc., being the one who wins. This is the reason why I wanted to do the random realm selection. It?s not about the side that spends the most to get the best allies; it?s about dealing with Murphy (as in Murphy?s Law) and the cards (so to speak) you?re dealt and making the best of them.

Or perhaps, do you mean how the realms on each side will be divided into teams? I do like your idea of the core realms submitting their assignments prior to the beginning of the battle. That way we would have time to balance the numbers if needed. I?m really hoping that all the realms will have their realm battle leaders designated prior to the campaign and that they?re utilized during the battles?unity of command is a critical element in success on the battlefield.

Wolfpack fighters will not fight for either side. Since we?re going to be running the event, we probably won?t have that many fighters available. We?re going to be the random element.
We will be able to enter a specific battle and will attack anyone regardless of side.

>>6. Not at the moment, but I'm really foggy on the teams thing.

I hope this helped to clarify that.

In answer to Fowler?s question, yes, the marshals would have radios with them. I was envisioning that there would be at least 4 marshals for the campaign: one monitoring the campaign map(s) with the Strategists, one as the center marshal announcing the different battles and scenario-specific rules, and one on each of the sides? starting lines to indicate when each team would be able to enter the battle. As soon as the Strategists have made their moves, the marshal by the campaign map would radio the battle type to the other marshals to include in what sequence the teams would be entering the battlefield.

Kyrian

2 out of 3 is the way to go. Even if some of the battles take awile. I think these battles are unique enough that the ones that take awile people will want to do again.

I've added a poll to to the top of this thread about what's the best way to resolve control of a contested hex. Please vote.

Thanks,

Kyrian

arky wrote:2 out of 3 is the way to go. Even if some of the battles take awile. I think these battles are unique enough that the ones that take awile people will want to do again.

Then do the whole scenario more than once.

We're adding logistics and strategy into the mix, and many RL battles are decided by correct first impressions. One battle per hex is most pure.

Fabulously realized idea Kyrian!

Thanks for the support, Palantir!

It's funny how I've basically fallen back into a military planning mode in trying to think this through, i.e., visualize the flow of the operation, see where the potential problems are, and come up with contingency plans. Lather. Rinse. Repeat about 20 times...And don't get me started on the logisitics to make this work... ...It just makes my head hurt sometimes.

I don't like getting caught short and I'm very much concerned as to how someone can manipulate the rules to their benefit or to confer some type of advantage. I've seen it too many times in attempts to develop a campaign format for our battles. This is one of the reasons why I chose to go with the random selection of realms. I don't want one side "stacking the deck" in their favor.

Kyrian

I had a couple of ideas for additional scenarios. I'm just brainstorming here so I apologize if they're not that well thought-out:

1) Hold the line.
--The enemy is making its way closer to your starting base. You've decided to draw the line here.
--Defenders start out as a linear defense. The defensive line extends both ways past the battefield so no flanking is possible.
--Attackers have to punch their way through the defensive line and reach the command post (not sure what I'll use for this) and take out the defense commander.
--Defenders make sure this doesn't happen.
--Defenders will designate one of the teams to be the mobile defense. They start out past the defensive line and may move anywhere on the field. They may, however, not cross the defensive line into friendly territory. The remaining defenders must not pass the defensive line.

In a nutshell, this is a monarch battle where only the defenders have a monarch. They have to keep him/her alive. The defenders win the scenario if they manage to eliminate all of the attackers. The attackers win if they kill the commander.

2) Rout
--The attackers have broken through the defensive line and the defenders are attempting to fall back and regroup.
--Attackers must eliminate all of the defenders' forces.
--Defenders will have a start point and an end point. Once the scenario begins, the defenders have to get at least 10% of their forces to the end point in order to win, i.e., rally enough forces to form a counter-attack. The defenders can also lose if the War Leader is killed.
--Attackers will be spread out throughout the entire route the defenders have to travel.
--This is very similar to the convoy except you have to preserve your forces rather than escort goods and supplies. Will you willingly sacrifce 90% of your forces that 10% would survive?

Kyrian

Kyrian,
You might want to play test this in a Wolfpack Practice about 2 weeks before Spring War. The they will all know how this is supposed to operate (ideally), and then you can hammer out the final logistics in the remaining two weeks.

Bump!

Spring War is 3 weeks away...

If anyone has got any ideas or questions, please post them now. I'm probably going to post the final draft of the rules on the national board at the beginning of next week.

Thanks for everyone's help.

Kyrian

P.S. It's close but it looks like the simple majority of voters want a single fight to determine the outcome of each battle. If you're planning on voting, do so now. I'm going to close the poll at the end of this week.

Just in case I end up resetting the poll, here's where we are right now:

38%-7 people-want best 2 out of 3
50%-9 people-want a single battle
11%-2 people-don't care

Honestly Kyrian since hardly anyone has voted or knows to vote, I say since your running the great war, you decide how you would like to run it. I dont think any of us would mind either way. Just so long as all the details are worked out and it can run smoothly I dont think people will care. It sounds like this will be a whole lot of fun and i am totally looking forward to it.

Yeah, too bad I won't be a leader or a strategist- would be hellua cool!

One of the things that came up was that it took too long to divide the teams on each side. Each Strategist/War Leader had to basically announce the team and which realms were in it. Also, the numbers didn't work out too well because I used the sign in sheets from Troll, not the actual number of fighters on the field.

What about dividing the sides into teams by using the number of years a fighter has been fighting? First off, the fighters would be divided equally between the two sides. Then, each side would be broken down by years. For example, Team I would be all fighters with more than 5 years of fighting, Team II would be all fighters between 4 and 5 years, Team III would be all fighters between 3 and 4 years, Team IV-between 2 and 3 years, and Team V-less than 2 years. Once that was accomplished, we could balance the corresponding teams if needed so that Blue Team I doesn't significantly outnumber Read Team I.

Now, the Strategist has to take into account the experience level of their teams--adding another layer of thought. From what I saw and the feedback from both Kegg and Onyx, for the most part, the strategic map portion of the campaign was playable. Only the scenarios themselves really required significant tweaking.

The only trick now is figuring out how to communicate the battles more quickly so that people aren't standing around so much...

Kyrian

Like I mentioned before, I don't think the regular fighters on the field get any added "value" from the board game setup. A few folks involved directly do, but the fighters in the war itself (95%+ of the participants) had no idea and no involvement.

-O