It's not a matter of design, it's a matter of game mechanics.
The thing is if someone uses it the game can drastically change. Like say the Germans or UK decide to intimidate Sweden. Regardless of the result it has a fairly good impact on the game. Maybe I am blowing this out of context too large and it isn't an issue. It was meant as the risk is not worth the reward. But if it isn't then why have it in the game? Things in my games have an equal benefit and consequence that need to be decided on by the player.
Buy more armor? Uses more oil, logistics, and port supply but are strong units that can push lines.
Buy more infantry? Log logistics, port supply use, and no oil but are moderate strength and can't push lines quickly.
Buy more air? uses oil, logistics and port supply, but you can support many attacks or focus on 1 target.
Balanced selections. Intimidate is unbalanced. That's why I regret it. But so far no one has complained.
Games worked on
Designer of the Strategic Command 2 products
- Brute Force (mod)
- Assault on Communism
- Assault on Democracy
Designer of the Strategic Command 3 products
- Map Image Importer