Quote Originally Posted by Rogue View Post

How was the campaign organized?(map, tree, latter, multiplayer, one on one, etc.)

What happened in the campaign?

What did you think of it?

Anything that would make it better?

Honestly any general thoughts on 40k and campaigns is what I am looking for. It may be that 40K is not as conducive to a campaign as WFB was, though I would hope not.
We use a tree style campaign and discuss the stakes for each battle, force composition restrictions and where it fits in the overall scenario.

I should note we use 2nd ed. rules and objectives, so a little different from what you are doing.

Our current campaign started with the Orks fighting for control. So we did and Ork vs Ork battle over the Power Claw of Rulership. I lost, so my friend gets to play the Orks.

I'm playing the Tyranids. Our first battle was a meeting engagement - no heavy support for either side, both seeking to enter the other's deployment zone. (Dawn Raid objective).

The result was a total rout of the Orks. So the next scenario will be the Orks trying to put together a defensive line. They will use Engage and Destroy (enhanced VPs for kills) while I will use Terrorize (bonus VPs for breaking units' morale).

We have a general idea of what should come next, but the battle can change how we proceed. The death of a major leader, loss of key equipment - all that has downstream effects in real life, so we try to make them part of the campaign.

Sometimes that means that one side will quit before they were totally wiped out, which is more realistic than just trying to score points.

Hope that helps.