Kill Team Campaign - Advice Wanted

[Kinstryfe]

Hello fellow Kill Team enthusiasts. I'm trying to arrange a campaign for my local flgs for the new year, but I've heard a lot of stories of burnout from campaigns going a full 12 weeks or from trying to end with only one surviving resource holder. I'm trying to think of a better way to run a more time limited campaign, and came up with the below. I'm looking for input as to whether people think it would work well, or better ideas to use instead.

 

 

The campaign will run across ±8 weeks of play. The game will run as an escalation, increasing to 125pts in week 3, 150pts in week 5, and then 200pts in week 7. Commanders will be added into the campaign in the final weeks at the 200pt level.

 

Players start week 1 with up to a 12 person roster, and may add or dismiss new members and specialists as per the rulebook.

 

Each week may take place in a different Killzone. Details will be provided each week as to what this entails.

 

Players will be assigned an opponent each week with whom they must play a single game. In light of how quick Kill Team is to play, players may play an additional game against the same opponent as well for participation credit. In this case the first match will count as the required game, and the second match as an optional game. Players may play up to three optional games per week, with up to two against any single opponent. Optional games may include 3 or 4 players for variety if the players wish.

 

Players will earn points each week for playing games of Kill Team with other league players. For their assigned game a player will earn 3 points for a win or 1 point for a loss. Players will also receive 1 point for each optional game they play each week up to three games, with a maximum of two games against a single opponent each week. Optional battles are about participation, and will count as 1 point win, lose, or draw.

 

Players will track their resources as per the rulebook. Kill teams reduced to Guerilla status will continue on as per the rulebook or that player may disband their warband and start over as a new kill team of their choice. At the end of the campaign, three additional points will be rewarded to each player with the highest total in each of the four resources.

 

Painting and Modeling, Sportsmanship, Fun Player Rewards. Near the end of the campaign, players will be asked to vote for the Best Painted or Modeled kill teams, the Best Sportsmanship in an opponent, and who was their Most Fun Opponent to play against throughout the campaign. Winners of these will gain 3, 2, or 1 points toward the campaign for First, Second, and Third Place respectively.

 

Does this seem like a sound basis to determine ranking overall in a time limited campaign?

[Brother Tyler]

The only issue I have is the 12-member limit on the starting command roster. Some kill teams can have 100-point kill teams that exceed 12 models (e.g., an all Ork Boyz kill team), while others can have considerable flexibility, insofar as their options allow, with 12 models (e.g., a Grey Knights command roster). I suggest revising that starting limit to a points-based limit - say 150 points. This will give each faction a relatively level playing field with regard to starting flexibility. You can then increase the points limit each round (though you may need to figure out some ceiling).

 

Another way to provide an incentive for playing optional games might be to allow players to exchange participation points for resources, perhaps when they hit certain thresholds. For example, if a kill team is reduced to 0 in two resources, they might be allowed to exchange some number of participation points (5?) to increase each of their resources by 1. Alternately/additionally, if a kill team is reduced to guerilla status, they might be allowed to exchange some number of participation points (10?) to increase each of their resources to 2. The main incentive here is that they will be able to keep their models' advancements - far better than starting over with a new kill team that doesn't have any advancements. The numbers I provided are theoretical and probably need to be balanced against where other players might be in terms of their resources at the stages where players might be reduced to 0/Guerrilla status.

[Kinstryfe]

Hmm. The 12 model start is (you probably knew) from the rulebook. That said, I agree with what you're saying. I like your 150pt starting threshold.

 

Resources seem like a problem for me just by how they work, giving no benefits except you aren't guerilla. However if they're removed, some specialist abilities no longer matter, which is also terrible. It's really tempting to try to find a way to either make them matter, or just do away with them and focus this purely on points.

 

Thanks for the feedback, it is appreciated.

[JaM_TW]

I havent red that part of the rules, but:

 

In Bloodbowl, your players gain extra skills/traits etc. Those are the players you want to use and protect. Maybe that works with KT as well?

You might want players with a decimated team (gone guerilla?) give the opportunity to "sell off" the chaff (guys with wounds) and keep the good ones.

Or allow them to build up a new kill team, formed by/with/around the members who did survive. The "vets".

 

This could lead to min-maxing, but if your team is killed off it's still nice to keep at least 1-2 members and form a new team. Maybe give them a penalty in movement or something, but it's always better than starting fresh.

 

You could at least give players the choice to do so. I'd take that choice, if only for narrative/fluff reasons.

 

Hope this helps!