NATO, WAPA and the indefensibility of LandJut in NGP and D85

[Glenn Saunders]

[It is my first foray into using the editors btw. I think it shows. If anybody can think of a better way of doing things I am all ears. The main thing here is of course the mythical question of "balance" and whether the attacker stands any chance of fulfilling his victory conditions given a more beefed up NATO side.

No - I can't think of a better way.

One of the issues I struggled with was NATO Intel. I mean if the WP was suddenly coming down the road, you would figure someone with a phone or a radio would pass this info one.

Another thing I did in another sector was to put small Objectives at key road junctions or choke points so that the NATO Player would see these change hands as the WP columns went through. You have to pick these carefully so that they can't be bypassed easily or without significant delay.

However on the other hand, you can't have too many or it completely buggers up the AI. YOu see the AI , as far as I know - knows what an objective is, but it doesn't do well judging their value. Given two Objectives, one 10 points and one 100 Points, it is differicult to say for sure what the AI would do - hold both - pick the big one or cluster around the small one.

When I was building the stock scns I had to consider the game played from both sides against the AI, (with AI Orders) as well as in PBEM matches.

Anyway - sounds like your enjoying playing with the editors and fiddling with the OOB and in that sense you are clearly getting enjoyment from the game yourself and you work is giving a lot of other people additional enjoyments as well. So in that respects go on you.

Glenn