Some thoughts as I put effort into growing Warmaster interest locally.
When it comes to introducing new players, 'burnt-hand-teaches-best' doesn't work for everyone.
If you have a collection of people all learning the rules but some slightly ahead of others, how best to keep everyone engaged?
I've been in campaigns where the more successful you were, the bigger your army was (laden with battle honours). Lesser mortals were crushed by the best players.
As an alternative, I'm looking at an informal 'campaign' that just barely links games together enough to put battles in some context.
Given the irregular nature of modern playing habits the map part will be faction on faction instead of individual players each having their own territory. This makes it much easier to accommodate player availability on any given game-night.
As a self balancing mechanism, I'm thinking that every time you break an opponent your total army size reduces by 50pts for next game. (If your army breaks, you add 50pts next time, up to a max of 2000pts.)
The individual 'leader' will be the player with the smallest army.
(Easily justified in the fluff. As the most successful general conquers more territory he has to provide troops for: garrison duties, protecting supply lines and the gradual attrition of campaigning in the field.)
Has anyone else encountered this and tried a balancing mechanism?
Regards
Hammerskelp
