My wargaming life is largely composed of playing
WHFB once a month with a bunch of guys over a Sunday afternoon. Each year (usually July to June on the calendar) we put together a campaign for the year and play for bragging rights. We've done all sorts of campaigns: map campaigns, territory campaigns, escalating campaigns, etc.
Right now, we've got some new people coming into the group, and I'm in charge of putting together the '08-'09 campaign. I was thinking of doing smaller armies rather than larger ones, so the new players don't have to be borrowing troops or using proxies so much. It would also encourage people to try for a fully painted army by the end of the campaign (something I'm not going to finish if you've been following the progress on my dwarfs at
http:strangevistas.wordpress.com).
What I was wondering, however, was your impressions of the Warhammer Warbands rules, particularly after the new edition. I'm already thinking I'd have to go with the house rule limiting missile-firing troops; I've played enough games of Warhammer Warbands to get that. Essentially, would it be better to go with, say, 1000 pt. armies with regular rules, or bring it down to 400 or 500 and Warband rules? With Warband rules, I probably wouldn't bother doing more to the "campaign" than just using their experience rules to bulk armies up over the year.
