Example: a Noldo player scores 1100 and a Woodman player scores 1000.
Half of all of the winning Noldo players have scored less than 1100,
so the Noldo player has no change in their rating. 75% of the winning
Woodmen players have scored less than 1000, so the Woodman players
rating goes up by (say) 25 points. Individual points are scored only
for members of a winning team, since the losing scores will be heavily
weighted towards 400 irrespective of nation. You could adjust the
benefits up/down to make the score changes similar to the other gauges
of player score.
The idea would have merit IF the VCs in anyway reflected how well the player played the position. A properly played Woodmen will recruit like mad until the DS are removed from the Misties and Greenwood, then have no armies. He'll have a bunch of 50 agents out scouting for the allies agents and curse squads.
Becuase of all that recruiting he did early, he probably never really built up his economy.
A well played Woodment isn't going to score well in VCs.
However, a poorly played Woodmen will not recruit early. He'll name characters and let the DS linger in the North. He'll build his economy instead of building scouts. He'll hord gold instead of spreading it around.
A poorly played Woodmen may do very well in VCs.
Darrell Shimel
(Does haing my name on the email make the point more accurate?)
ยทยทยท
_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com