asendaric_uk
2nd February 2008, 01:06 PM
I have played MEPBM for less than a year. I am learning fast and dont
make too many mistakes. This is because I have played, and am
currently playing games that contain good and experienced players on
both sides. If this new scoring system was in place 12 months ago,
would I of been permitted to play with such good players ? I doubt it
somehow. I think I would of been stuck in a game with other low
ranking players. This would bring various problems. Lack of co-
ordination, more mistakes, and less guidance to name a few. This
would of made the game far less enjoyable for me. Victory would be
more about lack of mistakes and luck, rather than tactical skill and
cunning. The game might go on for ages, because beginners are less
adept at recruiting dragons, solving riddles and grabbing artifacts.
Or it could end quickly due to bankruptcy and bad play, drops and
errors, How much fun would that be ?
I myself have played with Corsairs101 and find his behaviour more
than fine when discussing team tactics, moves etc. He is, like many
opposed to a single player scoring system that might ruin his
enjoyment of a game he obviously enjoys playing. A game that takes a
lot of time, money and effort to play. The game as it stands at the
moment is good fun, teams often have a mix of beginners and experts,
and the beginners learn from the experts. Personally it would be nice
to have an advanced individual score sheet AFTER a game is over to
see how your nation is rated by Harley. This would enhance the game
as it stands, but without altering the way some people would play
certain nations. It would also cut out the elitism that I fear would
ruin the game for new players. At the moment the VC's do not always
tell the true story of who played well in a game, this is very
apparent when you read the turn reports.
Dave Griffiths (as if it matters)
make too many mistakes. This is because I have played, and am
currently playing games that contain good and experienced players on
both sides. If this new scoring system was in place 12 months ago,
would I of been permitted to play with such good players ? I doubt it
somehow. I think I would of been stuck in a game with other low
ranking players. This would bring various problems. Lack of co-
ordination, more mistakes, and less guidance to name a few. This
would of made the game far less enjoyable for me. Victory would be
more about lack of mistakes and luck, rather than tactical skill and
cunning. The game might go on for ages, because beginners are less
adept at recruiting dragons, solving riddles and grabbing artifacts.
Or it could end quickly due to bankruptcy and bad play, drops and
errors, How much fun would that be ?
I myself have played with Corsairs101 and find his behaviour more
than fine when discussing team tactics, moves etc. He is, like many
opposed to a single player scoring system that might ruin his
enjoyment of a game he obviously enjoys playing. A game that takes a
lot of time, money and effort to play. The game as it stands at the
moment is good fun, teams often have a mix of beginners and experts,
and the beginners learn from the experts. Personally it would be nice
to have an advanced individual score sheet AFTER a game is over to
see how your nation is rated by Harley. This would enhance the game
as it stands, but without altering the way some people would play
certain nations. It would also cut out the elitism that I fear would
ruin the game for new players. At the moment the VC's do not always
tell the true story of who played well in a game, this is very
apparent when you read the turn reports.
Dave Griffiths (as if it matters)