|
Jabba -> RE: Prestige question (6/10/2012 9:53:08 PM)
|
I think it is absolutely obvious that a player should not be penalised for capturing objectives successfully. It is gamey and irritating that the prestige system incentivises you NOT to achieve a victory ahead of schedule. This is clearly an oversight and should in my opinion be fixed.[:-]
Yeah, a decisive victory is better than a marginal one - but not in terms of prestige! You receive less prestige for a decisive victory than a marginal one, which is completely nonsensical.
And whichever type of victory you are aiming for, you maximise your prestige by taking as long as allowed, and not less. So if you are allowed 14 turns for a decisive victory - make sure you take EXACTLY 14 turns, and not 13 turns! Otherwise you miss out on the prestige you get per turn.
And if you don't manage a decisive victory, then the rational thing is to sit around for several more turns doing absolutely nothing so that you clock up even more prestige until you march into your last objective on the very last turn!!!
The designers simply didn't think this through. Don't tell me that there is some gameplay rationale for making players eke out the game in this way, because there isn't.
Players who win ahead of schedule should, at the very least, receive prestige equivalent to what they would have received if they had taken the maximum number of turns to win. Ideally they should also be positively rewarded for winning more quickly.
That is just common sense, and means that the player isn't faced with the irritating incentive to extend the game artificially by leaving the last objective vacant.
|
|
|
|
