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.

I have a idea for doing a large 40k campaign and was wondering if I could get some input from you guys. The idea is to have a set amount of points (say 10,000) with it you buy fluffy army.
The campaign will be setup on a risk style map in which you get to place your armies. I think I would limit the amount of points per area on the map to try and stop balling up (say 2k points).
What I'm hoping to get out of it is a 40k game that has both strategy and tactics and the unbalance that the game may have will be on the player for getting his troops setup/moved incorrectly.
I would be doing this with a friend so the setup and time required is not a big issue. Do any of you guys have experience with some thing like this? If so got any tips for making this both fun and at least sorta balanced?

If you were going to use risk as a base of the map and any attacks to be made. Maybe consider each infantry is worth 100 points? So cannons are 300 points (I'm fairly certain they were 3 infantry in value) Etc.

That way you play out a normal game of risk and supplement the battles with 40k matches at the specified points levels, is that what you are going for?

so a game of say 300pt vs 400-500pt could still end in an upset, but something like 2000pt vs 100pt would almost be not worth playing.

Would you take casualties from the actual 40k game into account? EG if the winner (or loser) finishes the game with say 340pts out of their starting 700pts that would round down to 300 so they lose 4 infantry? alternatively this gives the loser of the game if it ended before a tabling the chance to still have 1 or 2 infantry left alive on a zone.

If you take that route however the game would take a very long time to play considering how many attacks can happen in a round of risk. Maybe you would need a rule where the loser is just wiped out or their surviving infantry retreat to the next zone?

A lot of people and groups have done large, successful campaigns. I'd look into some of them first before you start. The Forgeworld books also have an excellent campaign set-up.

If you're going for a Risk style campaign, which could take forever if you play every attack, you might consider adding an "auto resolve" feature to it. It would be something similar to the Total War PC games but instead of a computer figuring out who wins, you use the Risk way of deciding who wins (roll an appropriate number of dice for each side, highest dice wins etc). That way you only have to play the games you really want to or are most important such as a region with a specific resource or special effect.

Ed