Anyone have any experience with or know of a good strategic campaign

Well i know kill team has rules for a campaign where units that survive one battle get like exp and shit. but other than that i don't know.

>>50663542
I like the veterancy idea, but I want to capture building and maneuvering armies. I like the idea of earning requisition to build and replenish armies but I haven't found a system that seems reasonably manageable.

I was thinking of maybe assigning a strategic value to each territory, maybe with faction HQs generating requisition that can be used to field or replenish armies and limiting other territories to resources that can be pooled for upgrades, fixed fortifications, stockpiled resources that grant special rules for the course of a battle... that kind of stuff. Maybe with a cap on point disparity between forces so an attacker can pool forces without it being an absolute shutout.

>>50663411

5th Edition had Planetary Empires, which I can't seem to find in any of the megas. You can still buy it from GW. There is at least one version of rules on Scribd, but fucking scribd wants a damned credit card number for a "free" membership.

Planetary Empires seems to have most of what you're looking for, has a persistent tile-based overmap and still has each player play small battles, with rules for reinforcements and such.

There's also about a dozen sets of houserules or blended rules based on Planetary Empires.

If you want 7th edition stuff:
Planetary Onslaught has 6 missions each for Planetstrike, Stronghold Assault, and Cities of Death, which allow you to play some asymmetric campaigns with one attacker and one defender. The missions can be played individually, but there are allowances for playing each set-of-6 as a small campaign, with small bonuses for the victor of each battle going into the next battle. There is also an inclusion to play a "Planetary Onslaught" campaign, by stringing each of the 3, 6-mission campaigns together into 1 18-mission campaign. Included are rules for generating a "Supreme commander," and bonuses for winning each phase.

Death from the Skies has an aerial campaign with bonuses for winning the "previous round," as well as rules for generating a continuous "Fighter Ace."

All volumes of Warzone Damocles and both volumes of Warzone Fenris have campaigns, but no particular mention of linking them together. Mont'ka, in particular, has rules for generating Tank Aces, but no mission-to-mission rules for the ace's growth.

Between all of that, Killzone, and Altar of War, you could probably cobble something together.

File: Victory is Vengeance.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>50663411
The HH campaign books are great at this, look at those for inspiration. Have the Kill Team rules for Horus Heresy, they are in book 3.

>>50663411
You can always pick The Campaign for North Africa and homebrew some stuff, if you have the autism.

>>50666485
I'll take a look at it, because man do I have the autism.

File: 700px-RegionTypes2.jpg (229KB, 700x610px) Image search: [Google]

229KB, 700x610px

>>50663411
I made a system that's based off of the campaign systems from Dark Crusade and the Total War games, though it hasn't been subjected to much playtesting and is probably horrendously unbalanced or something. I'm open to critique if anyone has ideas on how to make it better.

The Rules: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B20ZFeyGKxcwa1BGaDU4N3hfeWM
Maps: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B20ZFeyGKxcwS3NhM1RoNE9hTjA

>>50666485

But how much water do my space marines use per turn, especially if they're a chapter that loves their pasta?

>>50668747
Pretty cool, but won't the attrition rate be horrendous? What are the rules for killed units in each tactical game?

>>50670360
From what little of it I've played, the attrition rate is pretty high. I've been thinking about offsetting this by making every mission a random Eternal War mission to help alleviate this. It should encourage players to focus on completing objectives as well as killing each other, alleviating the attrition rate somewhat.

>>50670360
Do you think Army thresholds could even that out, like maybe 500 point increments? If you get crushed in a 2000 point battle and you lose 900 points of units, round up to the nearest 500 so that army moves forward as a 1500 point force until it is replenished through requisition points.

Maybe combine that with rolls to see who survived, forces that voluntarily quit the field via leaving the table edge are automatically saved, forces that are decimated and flee off the edge are saved on a 3+, 4+ if they were killed in a sweeping advance, 5+ if they were killed outright.

>>50672978
I'd like to avoid having a guy get tabled in game one and then having to quit the campaign because he's fighting at a deficit for the rest of the time. That wouldn't be fun for anyone... well except for THAT GUY, who we mostly refuse to play with anyway.

>>50670360
>attrition rate
This is the problem with 40K campaigns. Because it makes no attempt to handle non fatal casualties or psychology attrition is incredibly high unless you address these things.

Take a look at Stargrunt for a system that handles motivation, off table support and the effects of wounded squad members on the rest of the squad.

>>50673876
For example - if two members of an eight man fire team are wound then the team is combat ineffective.

Only half the team is able to fight as two members will be tending to wounded, carrying their gear, helping them move, etc. Unless they are highly skilled they'll struggle to do anything useful.

Additionally, their motivation will now be low so they will be highly likely to disengage from combat.

At this point, to make them effective again you need to medevac the wounded to raise their motivation and get them to 3/4 strength.

>>50663411
On the planetary or system scale?