Tell me about your map based campaign experiences!

[BrutalCities]

The TL;DR:
Hey guys! I'm writing some universal map based campaign rules.

I'd love to hear about your own experiences with map based campaigns!

More context and the goal:

 

I've had a blast playing Legions Imperialis lately. But it has led me wanting for better, more detailed campaign rules. Rules that are far more detailed and allow multiple forces to move around on the campaign map. Think more operational level, rather than strategic. Where the missions, deployment zones closely follow the location of formations on the map.

Imagine if individual formations moved on the map rather than an army as a whole - this will inform the type of mission you will then play and give far more context to your games!

I've written a bunch of rules already, inspired by a feeling that pick up game objectives are fine and dandy for gameplay's sake, but they are also kinda arbitrary. The current design trends for wargames lean towards matched-play, e-sports style rules. Which is fine but I've also played a bunch of them and they feel less exciting.

Lots of campaign rules out there - but none at this scale:

So of course, narrative games and campaigns are a good solution to the problem above. I was looking everywhere for some cool campaign rules but IMO they were all pretty simple. SO i'm just going to make my own rules.

 

The campaign rules I'm writing are intended for games of a scale of Warhammer 40k and above - any games that allow a level of combined arms list building. So, from Bolt Action, to Epic 40k and Legions Imperialis, to cold war games. I hope to cover a wide range of setting with some modular rules, so you can pick and choose the rules that suit your game system. If you are interested and have any thoughts on this, I'd love to hear from you! Please let me know about your experiences playing campaigns in the comments!

 

I have a 5 min survey here too if you'd like to see a bit more of the context and give me some more feedback and wish-lists. I've done a bunch of research already but more is good before I write too much! SURVEY HERE

 

[mel_danes]

Is this the right channel for this type of post?

[BrutalCities]

Is there a more appropriate forum?

[ThaneOfTas]

Maybe in AMICUS AEDES? 

[Xenith]

This isn't News, Rumour or board announcement, moving to Amicus where you'll have better engagement 

[BrutalCities]

AH sorry about that, thanks for the help guys!

[ThePenitentOne]

I like to use the system generation rules in the Tau dex to create my star systems. I make my rolls one at a time starting with the first planet/fleet/ military base from the sun and working my way to the fringe of the sector.

 

Once that's done, I create continents for every planet. Then I create STC settlements- usually an array of 5 x 5 territories. Then we seed the player armies- always using a combination of choice/ randomness. So for example, if there's a mining world, Votann are probably going to want to be there... But they may have to randomly determine which continent and settlement they start with, and then pick the territory in that settlement best fits their needs.

 

You can attack any territory in the same settlement. You split your force to hold territory, but any force in the settlement can be a part of an attacking or defending army. You can reinforce a neighbouring settlement, but only if you have adequeate transport capacity or jump troops/ teleportation. To reinforce a settlement on another continent, you need flyers. In order to get from one planet to another, you need voidcraft, and it can't be done as a reinforcement- you move from one planet to another in a campaign turn before/ after the battle.

 

I've also explored persistent battlefields linked to territories... But it's a lot of book keeping. It was neat though, because you build aver battlefield as an onslaught sized table, and if the game you're playing is less than onslaught size, you pich the portion of the onslaught sized table you want to use. This allows for "rooling battles" on the same field. So for example in battle one, if the attackers push defenders back, the second battle in that game can use the other side of the onslaught board- which didn't feature in the first game. You can also track terrain battle damage if you're going all in on hardcore book keeping and you use DIY terrain.

 

Boarding action rules also allow you to deal with interiors on a battlefield. So you could have two bastions on a 45" x 45" board, but each represents an entrance to an underground bunker, which is represeted by its own Boarding Action board. So you play on the 40k table, but have the option of putting BA units into the bunkers to fight BA games... But doing so puts you at a disadvantage on the 40k table. If you do this, do it sparingly- like at most, one battlefield per continent has an interiror terrain feature- compound games take a long time to play, and the book keeping becomes insane. In my campaign, I didn't even have an interior on every planet.

[BrutalCities]

@ThePenitentOne

 

Thanks for the information. Appreciate your eply!

That would be fantastic to play multi- what's the word...theatre? Branch? Sphere? 
BFG for space, 40k for small battles, epic for giant battles etc.

 

I like the turn delay rules. Makes for more important choices and planning.
Great Idea with the persistent battlefields too. 

Since the campaign rules I'm writing are limited in scope to ground war, and zoomed in a bit more  I'll be using a system of map features and divide the table into roughly 6 section’s of a foot by a foot (Or just under that size)
If there is a forest on one tile, you should place a heavily wooded area there. 

If there is a city or factory, the sector should be denser than usual. It's not to say you can't have ruins and terrain elsewhere, just that there should be a concentration and higher density there.

LOVE the boarding action rules idea for the denser section. I have used space hulk tiles in the past for that.

How many players do you usually have? Multiple sides or one side? (pls ignore if you already filled in my lil survey :) > Campaign Survey

There will be a bit of record keeping currently, as mentioned before, the rules are more zoomed in and feature supply line etc. However I'm going to make it as modular as possible so players can just simplify and pick and choose the rules. Formatting it in an easy to read way will go a long way to achieving that goal, I think.
 

[Antarius]

I don’t have a lot to add, but the big thing I’ve taken with me from my experiences with map-based campaigns is that bonuses from conquering/holding terrain needs to be very minor or be balanced out by either accompanying penalties (such as having to assign troops to hold the territories) or “leg up” bonuses for the player(s) who are on the back foot. Otherwise you get a progressively less interesting campaign where the initial winners keep winning and the losers keep losing, which is not very fun (although it is of course way more realistic this way).

[GSCUprising]

As mentioned in another recent thread here, my gaming group created rules and a campaign using BFG, Epic, and 40K for a campaign in the late 90s. It was an amazing experience, brought together players who would not normally have gamed against each other, and the scale was magnificent. I believe there was a lot of influence from Mighty Empires amd AD&D Advanced Manual in the rules set we made, too.

 

It took almost a year but was very satisfying. 

[BrutalCities]

@GSCUprising - sounds like peak gaming tbh. Gonna try another one?

 

So here is the set of ALPHA rules. Released for free for playtesting!
Get Tabletop Ops: Wargaming Campaign Rules here

Free campaign system designed for games from 40k to Epic 40k and other 6mm games. From platoon and company to division scale. From WWI to Sci-Fi settings!

These free Universal Campaign rules feature:

    -Formations (platoon to division size) moving independently on the map
    -Unit losses are removed from your Order of Battle
    -Commanders generate order tokens, which allow formations to perform orders like move, pick battle plans when engaged, build structures, call artillery fire missions and more.

Battle Plans: When 2 or more formations are engaged, each commander rolls off. The most wins picks the type of battle to play, as well as which map tiles are the battlefield (Played on tabletop)
This means that reserves can come on from the table edge and the battles reflect what's happening on the map.




There are also rules for:

    -Simple resources and victory point system
    -Recon system
    -Supply and logistics mechanics: formations that are too far from your supply depots,or have been cut off via enemy formations suffer penalties to their shooting and movement during games.
    -A whole bunch of narrative and faction archetype rules to inspire your narratives
    Asymmetrical win conditions

The rules have a number of balancing and modular options, so if the rules will break your game or are too detailed for your preference: just don't use them! Simple.

No AI used! It's in Pre-Alpha, I'm just play-testing it now and getting player
feedback.

There will be a lot of work needed before I'm satisfied with them, but It's playable. People will have to just tweak them or not use certain rules depending on what sort of campaign they want to play, and how the balance is going. They are generally more realistic than the campaign rules I've seen. So I admit they won't appeal to all players, and they really work best for 2 sides. You can have multiple people playing though.

 

 

@Antarius - yeah I have heard a fair few people corroborating that. A game master can help balance it at least. I guess too balance mechanics, it really depends on the type ofplayers. Some people don't care about balance, if it's more about the narrative - they are participating, not necessarily out to 'win' 

I have recently added some rules for Guerillas;
If their main army is cut off from supplies, and they are losing a lot they can get a sort of underdog bonus by becoming a guerilla faction.They no longer need to worry about supplies, but must abandon heavy equipment like tanks,artillery etc. 

Another balancing option- could be to have one factions HQ requisition some formations to fight on another system. (they don't need them apparently!)

Also, Advancing armies need to leave some units for garrison duty. They also have longer supply lines - and cutting them off has substantial penalties, if you choose to use the logistics rules.

The system isn't designed for any one system. I would like to make supplements to modify it to suit the most popular games.

Actually in order of popularity, people have voted for these games:

I'll be playing it with legions imperialis myself.

I'd love to hear your thoughts on the system as is, if you want to check them out. - Get Tabletop Ops: Free Wargaming Campaign Rules here

 

[GSCUprising]

4 hours ago, BrutalCities said:

@GSCUprising - sounds like peak gaming tbh. Gonna try another one?

 

So here is the set of ALPHA rules. Released for free for playtesting!
Get Tabletop Ops: Wargaming Campaign Rules here

Free campaign system designed for games from 40k to Epic 40k and other 6mm games. From platoon and company to division scale. From WWI to Sci-Fi settings!

These free Universal Campaign rules feature:

    -Formations (platoon to division size) moving independently on the map
    -Unit losses are removed from your Order of Battle
    -Commanders generate order tokens, which allow formations to perform orders like move, pick battle plans when engaged, build structures, call artillery fire missions and more.

Battle Plans: When 2 or more formations are engaged, each commander rolls off. The most wins picks the type of battle to play, as well as which map tiles are the battlefield (Played on tabletop)
This means that reserves can come on from the table edge and the battles reflect what's happening on the map.




There are also rules for:

    -Simple resources and victory point system
    -Recon system
    -Supply and logistics mechanics: formations that are too far from your supply depots,or have been cut off via enemy formations suffer penalties to their shooting and movement during games.
    -A whole bunch of narrative and faction archetype rules to inspire your narratives
    Asymmetrical win conditions

The rules have a number of balancing and modular options, so if the rules will break your game or are too detailed for your preference: just don't use them! Simple.

No AI used! It's in Pre-Alpha, I'm just play-testing it now and getting player
feedback.

There will be a lot of work needed before I'm satisfied with them, but It's playable. People will have to just tweak them or not use certain rules depending on what sort of campaign they want to play, and how the balance is going. They are generally more realistic than the campaign rules I've seen. So I admit they won't appeal to all players, and they really work best for 2 sides. You can have multiple people playing though.

 

 

@Antarius - yeah I have heard a fair few people corroborating that. A game master can help balance it at least. I guess too balance mechanics, it really depends on the type ofplayers. Some people don't care about balance, if it's more about the narrative - they are participating, not necessarily out to 'win' 

I have recently added some rules for Guerillas;
If their main army is cut off from supplies, and they are losing a lot they can get a sort of underdog bonus by becoming a guerilla faction.They no longer need to worry about supplies, but must abandon heavy equipment like tanks,artillery etc. 

Another balancing option- could be to have one factions HQ requisition some formations to fight on another system. (they don't need them apparently!)

Also, Advancing armies need to leave some units for garrison duty. They also have longer supply lines - and cutting them off has substantial penalties, if you choose to use the logistics rules.

The system isn't designed for any one system. I would like to make supplements to modify it to suit the most popular games.

Actually in order of popularity, people have voted for these games:

I'll be playing it with legions imperialis myself.

I'd love to hear your thoughts on the system as is, if you want to check them out. - Get Tabletop Ops: Free Wargaming Campaign Rules here

 

I am leaving the house shortly (UK here) but will take a look this evening. Though it has been quite some years, I'll be happy to summarise my experiences versus what you propose.

 

You mentioned in your response to @Antarius about a Games Master. We used one to coordinate the overall campaign and oversee key conflicts. I imagine nowadays this would be easier to coordinate with the GM plotting all out on a shared spreadsheet and docs so all participants have immediate access to results. But, I look too much into it. I'll have a butcher's at the rules, first.

[calgar101]

On 5/19/2026 at 1:29 PM, GSCUprising said:

As mentioned in another recent thread here, my gaming group created rules and a campaign using BFG, Epic, and 40K for a campaign in the late 90s. It was an amazing experience, brought together players who would not normally have gamed against each other, and the scale was magnificent. I believe there was a lot of influence from Mighty Empires amd AD&D Advanced Manual in the rules set we made, too.

 

It took almost a year but was very satisfying. 

That's what it is all about! I'd love more info on your campaign.