>You keep saying it will be more fun, but all I can see is how it will be
>less fun. Explain to me how any given turn will be more fun when I'm
>plotting it based on how I can maximize my points, screw my team mates,
but
>still win the game. I've been there and done that. It was far LESS fun.
Hi,
I can think of two ways that the ratings create more fun, both based on
the
way that they help create a balanced game. No-one enjoys seeing Manchester
United beating up the Harlequin Games second Eleven, most people prefer
seeing evenly matched teams battle.a.)
The Valar rating gives you less points reward if you win a game with a
'better' side. Either a side full of good players, or a side with lots of
neutrals.If you win a game with 14 nations beating 11, you earn just about 0 VPs
If you win a game with 15 nations beating 10, you *lose* VPs
If you win a game with 11 brilliant players beating 14 new players, you'll
earn a moderate amount of points.If you win a game with 11 new players beating 14 brilliant players, you'll
earn a lot of VPs!I think that will help prevent lanslide games where all the neutrals end
up
ยทยทยท
on one side.
b.)
I also think that Clint can balance the teams in games by comparing the
player's ratings. That will lead to more fun.Sam