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.

So I am looking for a relatively short-term campaign that could be played with only two people. Really a narrative driven series of games. If you have any links to anything or have used anything in the past let me know. I have already came up with an escalation type of game that we did awhile ago with Orks vs. Tau. And that worked pretty well.

So his army is Tau, and has a small eldar alliance.
I have Black Templar, Orks, Imperial Guard and a smattering of Dark Eldar

We'd only have a few days of gaming to get through the campaign though. Any ideas?

FW IA11 Doom of Mymeara? Features Eldar VS IoM. Short campaign (5 missions iirc) and good for 2 players.
You could make the eldar/tau the attackers and IoM the defenders.

I just posted this in a related thread but the FW Conquest Campaign system is the best we've ever had. It's so easy to customize and can be tailored to fit pretty much any size group and any length of time. I can't say enough good things about it.

I wrote up blog post on getting it started, part 1 at least. Here: http://atticwars40k.blogspot.com/2016/04/conquest-campaign-for-dummies-part-1.html?

Came here to recommend Conquest as well. Absolutely fantastic resource.

 Eldarain wrote:
Came here to recommend Conquest as well. Absolutely fantastic resource.

Yeah seriously it's so good, there's never been anything quite like it. It does seem a little overwhelming at first but it's so worth the effort.

Gunzhard :

I re<d your blog entry. Why exactly you feel a not ,map-based campaign better and how does a map tie a campaign up in your opinion?>

Map based campaigns require all players to attend for every session so that everyone can move and everyone can fight all of battles they need to fight.

When someone doesn't show then you have to pause until certain battles get fought. Sometimes even though a player does show he has multiple battles to fight and again everything has to wait for all of those battles to happen.

Making things more abstract lets you keep things moving.

I've played map campaigns by internet. It's easily done without everyone attending a joint session.

This campaign is only two players, though. It's not going anywhere fast if they can't meet up for a game.

If you don't want to use a map, just write a list of battles and play through them. The order doesn't matter because you are not fighting for geographical objectives.

Battle at Red River. (Major water feature.)
Battle at Green City. (Built up area)
Battle at Blue Industrial Zone. (Hazardous terrain.)
Battle at Yellow Desert. (Open lines of sight.)
Battle at Pink Cathedral. (One key objective.)
And so on.

If Side A wins five battles and Side B wins three, Side A wins the campaign.

 _ghost_ wrote:
Gunzhard :

I re<d your blog entry. Why exactly you feel a not ,map-based campaign better and how does a map tie a campaign up in your opinion?>

Hey, yeah Scott-S6 pretty much already answered the question but the Conquest Campaign is super flexible and CAN be map-based if you prefer. We are certainly using it with a map, however, like the example I did in the blog, it's not "Fixed" so you are not locked into needing that next map/game/tile to continue the campaign. This is the (WIP) map for our current campaign: http://map.lazaruseffect40k.com/

I spent too much money on Planetary Empire tiles and even have a custom/magnetized map-tile base hehe but still, the Conquest system is so much more fluid, I'm ok with letting that stuff go. And as Kilkrazy said, if you really want a map campaign, and if you're willing to manage the map and especially if you do it online, it's doable -- just not nearly as good as the Conquest system in my opinion.