|
You know, we don't have to limit ourselves to just 2 sides. It seems to me that it should really be Imperials against everybody else, because that's what's in the background. Then, I'd suggest letting each race do its own thing, and the terms of victory for each race would unique. Also, I would bet that an imperial/non-imperial split would produce about an equal number of players.
Here's how I see things working, there are races that take and hold territory: imperial, tau, orks, chaos?, [exodites, too, but lets assume they're aren't in this subsector]; races that periodically raid territory: eldar (all types), chaos, ork (sometimes); and races that take territory and destroy/consume all useful resources: tyranids, necrons, chaos?.
Games between armies in the first group result in territory changing hands. Games between the 1st and 3rd groups either result in the 1st group losing territor, or the 3rd group being driven off. Games involving the the 2nd group determine whether the races achieve non-territorial objectives. Each race would start with some territories/palnets/systems, but only the 1st group could actually expand their territory in the campaign.
Ok, I need some time to unjumble my thoughts on this, I just want to suggest a more "every man for himself" type campaign instead of "ok, lets be friends and work together" BS thing. Then, we just need to give each race a suitably difficult objective (which woiuld probably be known to everyone in the campaign).
|
) if it gives them a chance of smashing some greenskins/bugs.