Question to players - Northern Fury
Posted: Sun Dec 29, 2013 2:58 pm
I have been working on a Battle Set called Northern Fury which is a WW3 start in 94 and the Soviet/WP are breaking through the GIUK Gap and NATO is trying to initially hold them back and then stop the thrust and through them back.
The problem I am having is that in the first 7 scenarios, its not much fun for the NATO player to essentially lose. I find myself skewing the victory conditions to the point where mere survival is a win.
What do you guys think of mixing up the playable side? Something like:
Scenario 1: NATO player, receiving the shock and awe and scrambling (already built - H hr)
Scenario 2-7: WP player, Sweep NATO out of the North Sea and GIUK Gap, ambphib & airborne ops etc
Scenario 8: NATO player: Hold the line (already built)
Most of the rest - pushing the Soviets back would be NATO player.
Very interested in your views on this. My initial thought was to make everything NATO player and then perhaps go back and build a Soviet Player set, but I'm not so sure now.
Thanks
B
The problem I am having is that in the first 7 scenarios, its not much fun for the NATO player to essentially lose. I find myself skewing the victory conditions to the point where mere survival is a win.
What do you guys think of mixing up the playable side? Something like:
Scenario 1: NATO player, receiving the shock and awe and scrambling (already built - H hr)
Scenario 2-7: WP player, Sweep NATO out of the North Sea and GIUK Gap, ambphib & airborne ops etc
Scenario 8: NATO player: Hold the line (already built)
Most of the rest - pushing the Soviets back would be NATO player.
Very interested in your views on this. My initial thought was to make everything NATO player and then perhaps go back and build a Soviet Player set, but I'm not so sure now.
Thanks
B