It seems to me that the way victory points are calculated doesn't
promote good teamplay.
I realize that the designers probably intended that there should be a
certain amount of suspiscion and hesitation even among the allied
nations (I think it even says so in the rulebook somewhere).
However I feel that despite the fact that I sympathize with the idea
behind it, the victory points distribution of today doesn't end up
very well.
Consequently I have this idea for you to think about.
Mabye it's been brought up before, I have no idea
How about letting the relations held towards a nation by the other
nations affect the VP:s?
Let each friendly/hated relation render 25pts, each
tolerated/disliked 10pts and each neutral 0pts (for instance).
My thinking behind this is that an active nation is likely to get
more friendly/hated relations towards it, than an inactive.
Possibly it could also discourage neutrals from jumping allegiance at
the last moment (since most other nations would probably have near
neutral relations towards them).
It seems to me that the way victory points are calculated doesn't
promote good teamplay.
I realize that the designers probably intended that there should be
a
certain amount of suspiscion and hesitation even among the allied
nations (I think it even says so in the rulebook somewhere).
However I feel that despite the fact that I sympathize with the idea
behind it, the victory points distribution of today doesn't end up
very well.
Consequently I have this idea for you to think about.
Mabye it's been brought up before, I have no idea
How about letting the relations held towards a nation by the other
nations affect the VP:s?
Let each friendly/hated relation render 25pts, each
tolerated/disliked 10pts and each neutral 0pts (for instance).
My thinking behind this is that an active nation is likely to get
more friendly/hated relations towards it, than an inactive.
Possibly it could also discourage neutrals from jumping allegiance
at
···
the last moment (since most other nations would probably have near
neutral relations towards them).
That gives some preferment to larger teams.
A team of four will all upgrade each other;
a solo player in the same game will be disadvantaged.
Jeremy
--- In mepbmlist@egroups.com, "Johan Nilson" <johan.nilson@m...>
wrote:
> Hi everyone.
>
> It seems to me that the way victory points are calculated doesn't
> promote good teamplay.
> I realize that the designers probably intended that there should be
a
> certain amount of suspiscion and hesitation even among the allied
> nations (I think it even says so in the rulebook somewhere).
>
> However I feel that despite the fact that I sympathize with the idea
> behind it, the victory points distribution of today doesn't end up
> very well.
>
> Consequently I have this idea for you to think about.
> Mabye it's been brought up before, I have no idea
> How about letting the relations held towards a nation by the other
> nations affect the VP:s?
> Let each friendly/hated relation render 25pts, each
> tolerated/disliked 10pts and each neutral 0pts (for instance).
>
> My thinking behind this is that an active nation is likely to get
> more friendly/hated relations towards it, than an inactive.
> Possibly it could also discourage neutrals from jumping allegiance
at
> the last moment (since most other nations would probably have near
> neutral relations towards them).
>
> What do you think?
>
> Johan
How about letting the relations held towards a nation by the other
nations affect the VP:s?
Let each friendly/hated relation render 25pts, each
tolerated/disliked 10pts and each neutral 0pts (for instance).
My thinking behind this is that an active nation is likely to get
more friendly/hated relations towards it, than an inactive.
I think it's a good idea. The drawback is that some nations get a lot of
free points in this system. When I play a FP nation I often downgrade CL
and LR early for protection against their agents, for example. And
nations situated in the middle of enemy territory, like DrL, get a lot of
points from their neighbours, but that may be a good thing.