This issue has aroused many opinions lately. The most
common consensus is to alter the Victory Point system
to more fairly reflect the struggles the leader of a
poorer nation must conquer in order to place, compared
to the more powerful nations, who coast to victory
regardless of play.
AreVPs or individual game winners actually necessary? Apart from the
"satisfaction" of seeing one's name at the top of the list at game end there
isn't actually any benifit to coming first that I can see. Most people on
the list seem to be aware that the VPs do not necessarily reflect the skill
or effort put in by players. I know that in some games I've played better
but ended up with less victory points than in other games where I didn't
play so well. As often as not it can be the luck of the draw who scores
well and who does not - if the opposition really target one player their VPs
will most likley plummet, even though they may have played really well & end
up on the winning side. Conversely, someone might appear do have done well
simply because they were left alone all game - what does this prove?
Surely the best way to encourage team play would be to get rid of VPs
altogether - that way there is little purpose to sitting back and amassing
power while others fight at the front. Granted, some people may continue to
do this anyway but I suspect that removing VPs would be something of a
deterrant.
Any system of measuring VPs to decide an individual winner will be flawed in
my opinion. If you base it on nation strength it encourages players to be
less helpful to their team mates as doing so may weaken their own position.
On the other hand some people have mentioned basing it on damage done to the
opposition, but, even this will favour some nations over others. For
instance, if the DS win how often will anyone kill more FPs than the Cloud
Lord, or steal more gold?
I think that the only real use I can see to Vps is that they sometimes give
clues about the strength of the other side. For instance, if you have no
money, low loyalty settlements & poor characters, but a huge army then it
can be useful to look at VPs. Suppose in the above circumstances you have
800 vps then at least this gives you some idea of how strong the other
side's armies are. Otherwise I think VPs should be ignored.
Regards
Adam Mitchell