I agree. Lots of talking - background music would have taken away/distracted from what you are saying. Less words - more visual then music, but informative videos like this then no music.
We'll have to see what warbands I manage to get finished. I try not to talk too much about warbands I haven't experienced, and I don't play with unpainted minis! That being said, I am currently working on the Orc Mob, Sons of Hashut and Bretonnian Knights. Thanks for watching.
One crucial bit of information that seems to get a bit confused at around 12 minutes is that the choice of district to fight over can be any location that “either” player can reach not one they both can reach. That ensures that you can fight anybody at any time. And you don’t have to fight your neighbour. The first thing is to get an opponent and then you each choose a district to fight over. You could feasibly have multiple people battling over the same district all simultaneously in different battles with all of the winners gaining a foothold. So there’s no need to secretly pick districts to battle in, just freely choose one, and either come to a compromise, maybe picking something else mutually with your opponent or roll off. Also good to stress that having “control” of a hard fought district is dangerous as it opens you up to being Surprise Attacked if you have to defend it, which is a really hard scenario to defend in. And the other sneaky way of handicapping a player who has control is for two warbands to fight a battle in the district he has control of. Boom one of the other players now has a foothold so nobody has control anymore and the original player with control can’t benefit from the district boon. Really good video but those above points are some of the things that really elevate the rule set of this map campaign above a lot of other rule systems for me. Love your videos though, I absolutely must stress that!!
One way to fix the "one player too far ahead of everyone else" problem is to allow two players to challenge the top player to a 2-on-1 battle against them. To signify weaker warbands making a temporary alliance to dislodge a more powerful warband. If the alliance team wins, they both get the spoils of battle. You may wish to institute hard rules for who is allowed to make such alliances, and when. Like, if one player is some arbitrary amount ahead of everyone else. Or only the two weakest warbands can ally. Or make it so these alliance battles can only happen later in the campaign, when the gulf between players is most pronounced.
Honestly love this concept. I also really appreciate you sharing your reasoning for why your campaign fell apart at the end. That’s super helpful to know! Thanks for another quality Mordheim vid 🤘🏼
Really enjoyed this video and love the map campaign idea. I mentioned in one of your other videos that I'm running a 16 player campaign. What helped so far to maintain interest is that players are organised into teams and I set a win condition each month that isn't necessarily winning the most games. This means players can help their team win even if they lose a battle. It's a slow campaign too. I'm running it Jan-Nov. Players play 0-3 games a month and this has helped people factor in bust lives but still be involved.
@@GetTabled It's been great fun so far. We probably have about 10 regulars and 6 dipping in and out when they can. Thanks for sharing links to the map, etc.
There is a similar concept in Necromunda. But instead of using a map, you randomly draw cards to determine what areas are available. (# of players x3) most campaigns I've played last (# of players x 2) matches long. So the more players the longer it lasts and the more territory is to gain. But only 1 person can hold any given territory at 1 time. It may be a fun way to try mordheim map. 🤷🏼♂️
That is an interesting concept. It might streamline the territory collection process, but it takes a bit of the choice away from players. But sometimes having fewer decisions is a good thing. Thanks for watching.
@GetTabled great video I rather enjoyed it. The necromunda way is a really enjoyable system. Players still get to pick which territory they attack. You pick which territories are available at the beginning of the campaign and then pick which territory and scenario are being played before each battle.
@@tannergee Sounds fun. I know someone in our gaming group was proposing an idea like this for Mordheim, so maybe I will get to give it a try sometime.
Necromunda gangs gained and defended territory, but not on a hive or even sector map. But you could draw out the hive sector of your campaign as a map I guess.
@@badlanz8642 If you have a fairly decent computer, there is a large group that plays Mordheim on Tabletop Simulator. Or it might be worth reaching out on Facebook, Reddit, or the Mordheim Discord server for players in your area.
So .... as an attempt at addressing burnout in a campaign..... What if halfway thru the campaign you let the bottom half if the table reroll a new warband, with an adjust starting money and/or maybe from expanded bit more unbalanced warband list? Just to keep it fun?
That could be a good way of dealing with it. I have tossed around a few ideas like that, but it takes time to test things so its hard to know what the best route is.
This video released at a fantastic time! Just getting into organizing a campaign using this map for the first time. Thanks! How did you get this map printed out? Any service you recommend?
Most warbands cannot purchase hunting arrows during warband creation. You have to make sure it is on the equipment list for you r specific warband. If you acquire hunting arrows later, they last forever as long as the warrior carrying them doesn't die or get robbed or something.
Thanks for you wisdom around the map game. Me and some friends were thinking of trying it out. If you would suggest a catch up mechanic how would you design it? Bigger warbands get less gold? Free hired swords for one off matches for lower warbands? Or just keep the campaign to 6 games?
A shorter campaign means less time for a warband to pull ahead, for sure. But, you also see less of the map getting explored. If you are playing with several people, you could work in a multiplayer battle every few games. These games can do a good job of resetting the power levels, especially if the weaker warbands make an effort to team up against the stronger warbands. I am not sure if there exists a monetary or material reward for underdogs that would be a definitive fix for the problem beyond what already exists in the rulebook. At least, not one I can think of off the top of my head.
Thanks for the overview. I'm in the process of building terrain for mordheim with the intention of playing a short campaign with a few friends. You mentioned that some of the warbands are stronger than others; are there any that should be avoided for balance sake? None of us has played before so perhaps it won't matter?
The warbands from the rulebook all play fairly well with each other. There are some supplemental warbands that are built a bit stronger than the originals, such as those found in Border Town Burning or the Lustria campaign setting. It is more of a thing where, depending on the scenario, certain warbands will stand a better chance of winning. For example, skaven can dominate in a breakthrough scenario due to their speed. I wouldn't worry too much about it if you haven't played, and just focus on trying to learn the game and figure out what each warband is good at.
People seems to think shadow warriors + undead and lizardman are quite strong. Seems to me if more comes down to the dice rolls. In the span of a single campaign I don't think you would see too much difference.
@@GetTabled right, thanks for the advice. Alright started on my cult of the possessed so I'll stick with them. I think if I suggest we all stick to the warbands from the rulebook it won't ruffle too many feathers.
@@maximilian-3563 okie doke. Knowing my friends undead is the most likely of those three to make an appearance. Is that the undead warband from the core book?
@@Wooteq44 That's what we did as well. We recently finished a different campaign using any warbands from 1a-1c, and my Sisters of Sigmar really had to work to keep up with some of the others. The Shadow Warriors were shooting everything dead and the Black Orcs were very tough to take out.
Thanks for your videos. I was wondering if someone has found a fair solution to prevent snowballing ? That’s my main concern for our upcoming campaign using this map.
If you are playing with more than 2 players, warbands can team up against the top dogs using the rules from Town Cryer #5. There are rules for forming alliances and even an Ambush scenario that can be used to target a top dog's foothold.
Do you think making it so just exploring a district gives the perk and only hard fought district either needing control or a foothold would help reduce people snowballing? Also do you have any suggestions for catch up mechanics? My group is keen to play quite a few multi games, maybe every 3 games or so. I'd thought maybe dishing out some gold to those not doing that well at this times could work?
I don't think simply exploring should earn anyone a perk, as power levels will climb too high and there is less incentive to actually win battles. I think if you are keen to play multiplayer battles, then the problem of snowballing will start to self correct. Players can team up on the runaway winners and knock them down a peg. If two warbands are targeting another warband's foothold, the Ambush scenario from TC5 can serve as a nice way to hinder the runaway leader.
Yeah for sure teaming up on the big guy would help. We planned to run free for all's but Alps team matches. Would be the strongest paired W the weakest vs the two middle warbands, how effective this will be depends on how far apart the warbands are. I know you said you let ppl reset if their warband get done in. We also had a similar idea, but you would get extra gold . So +50gc if you reset after 3 games then by the 6th maybe 100 extra gc. Any thoughts on this?
I took this map and made one twice as big, doubled the amount of locations and added a couple of extra gates. Its on a 1.5 × 2.5 ft board. I haven't used it yet 😂 only been a couple of months though.