• Registered: 2006-01-06
  • Posts: 28

Topic: ISS Campaign Question

On page 78 of ISS section 7 of the "Simplest Campaign" seems to give an  incentive to "play to lose". The side that loses a scenario, and any player who declines battle recives Replenishment Points, but the victor does not.

Is the intention that the agressor becomes stronger strategicly (more Victories towards the required total to win), but the loser becomes stronger tactically (repaired and new ships)?

Is this a campaign ply balance mechanism, or should the victor be recieving RPs too?

  • Registered: 2006-03-03
  • Posts: 92

Re: ISS Campaign Question

dave-the-lost wrote:

On page 78 of ISS section 7 of the "Simplest Campaign" seems to give an  incentive to "play to lose". The side that loses a scenario, and any player who declines battle recives Replenishment Points, but the victor does not.

Is the intention that the agressor becomes stronger strategicly (more Victories towards the required total to win), but the loser becomes stronger tactically (repaired and new ships)?

Is this a campaign ply balance mechanism, or should the victor be recieving RPs too?

Given that the winner of the battle gets everything other than hull points repaired, I'm not sure that they're at that steep a disadvantage.