Jump to content


Anyone run a Store Campaign?

  • Please log in to reply
22 replies to this topic

#21 Babaganoosh



  • Members
  • 367 posts

Posted 08 June 2014 - 03:58 PM

I plan to differentiate the strike and ambush missions through changes in deployment.

For example a strike mission would have the attacking force deploy across the board from its target, and the defending force deploy near that target defensively.

An ambush mission would have the defender deploy in a compromised position. This could be accomplished by either having the defender deploy first, then have the attacker deploy second, with little or no restrictions.

I do plan on making specialized versions of each type of mission; one of which, "Strike: Asteroid Base" should be uploaded already. Other strike missions might be strike: command post, supply depot, listening outpost, etc.

Specialized ambush missions might be ambush: training day, preemptive strike, convoy, etc.

The different sub-types of mission will have the same general feel of strike or ambush missions but the specifics will be different, how so i can't say until i write them up. While i dont plan on making a preformed narrative to go along with these, it would not be difficult to make one using them i think.

#22 hecabomb



  • Members
  • 68 posts

Posted 08 June 2014 - 08:31 PM



The main idea for this is to get people to do some really crazy list building. The campaign does not tamper with the core 100pt game but encourages you to try different things via list restrictions (blockades, sabotage etc).

I was also trying to avoid a mission based structure so that the campaign could be easily balanced.


Interesting. How would you represent the blockades and sabotage?

Hm, I wonder if mission style would be less balanced. I suppose it wouldn't if your system ensures 100 pnt battles. How would you maintain the balance, once the balance starts to get less balanced at the higher level? I'm not pretending that my system would ensure that 100 pnt balance, though I think I can have it structured so that I ensure that the missions present a scenario where even the underdog has a competitive chance of victory, even if that chance is not the same as the upperdog.




More detail:

  • Each Month consists of 4 Fleet Movements (in alternating order).
  • Before the 4 Fleets Move, you perform 2 steps in the following order: Play Event Cards, List Building.
  • Event Cards enable certain list restrictions (via named pilot assassinations, ship sabotage, Supply blockades).
  • List Building is restricted via Supply. Supply is determined via connecting Territories to your Home World. If you are not in Supply, you may not replenish named pilots, expended secondary weapons/bombs, modifications, advanced systems, R2s etc. in the next Cycle.


This was really to give it a feel of a huge Galactic Campaign but with no changes to the core game so that it keeps you well-acquainted for the conditions in a regular tournament. That said, I made this up before Epic was announced, so it can be a little outdated!


You're right, I do intend to keep the game balanced via 100pt rules. In the most desperate scenario, you could still field 8 Academy TIEs or 2 A wings 3 B wings, which are perfectly fine competitive lists. Capturing more territory simply enables you more options in List Building, but it's not really a huge advantage, if you think about it.


In my head, this system forces people out of their comfort zone (like me always playing Kath + mini swarm) and gets them to try new things.


Actually how do I upload stuff here? Would be easier for you to read it. Pardon my lack of tech-fu

#23 eagletsi111



  • Members
  • 474 posts

Posted 09 June 2014 - 04:58 PM

My Stores Campaign:



© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS