My conceptual approach to mission design might confuse some players. I think it's important for my "readers" to get some idea what i am thinking about when designing a mission. I like to draw on my D&D encounter designing experience. Every mission should be unique and interesting. Now in a game system where we have codices that determine what the players play it falls to the mission to change how the players play. Objectives, kill points, victory points and quarters are the common goals for a game and balanced missions. Designers often utilize a combination of all of them to make missions. my goal is to break away from that and turn the crazy meter up to a 9.5.
Balance isn't a factor I take a lot of stock in. I give both sides special rules out of fairness. Balance is the difference between Chess and 40k, If you want balance play the same list and see who can come out on top. The test of skill in 40k is taking what you have and making it work.
So in that spirit I recommend, play more than one game, take turns being attacker and defender and pick the mission and tailor your army. Your not always playing in a tournament so if your buddy doesn't play grey knights don't worry about planning for them. change the missions to fit you play group and for the love of the Emperor have fun!
One thing that is easier to address balance with in missions to is to restrict to certain codices. It seems counter-productive at first, thinking that you isolate people from the game, but like GW tried to do with the battle missions book, many times its easier to tailor the missions to armies to ensure people have fun.
ReplyDeleteIn a way, it's the same thing as building an army to a mission but rather than mission is also built to the army.
that's a very good point. my only reservation is a lack of in depth knowledge about certain codices.
ReplyDelete