Suggested re-work of prestige and morale
Posted: Wed Nov 12, 2025 7:00 am
1. Fleet morale.
This never seems to go higher than 1, and usually times out after a while, usually all happening in peacetime from what I've experienced. So most of the time, it's irrelevant.
It should go up 1 after every major victory, the more so if the VP ratio is high e.g. > 2:1 or something. Conversely it should drop after defeats. This is in addition to event-based changes.
What does it do anyway?
2. Prestige from battles.
Why is the gain never more than 1 or 2 even after a heroic victory? The clear incentive for gamey-ness is to sink maybe 1-3 large enemy units and then run away so you can get another 2P next battle, which is how I suspect some of the very high P results being logged by players are obtained. This is highly unrealistic and there is no reward for inflicting a crushing defeat instead of an ordinary one--quite the opposite.
My suggestion is to scale the P granted in line with the VP ratio, like morale, and conversely, lose P for 'unable to challenge' in a sea area. Where the enemy is unable to challenge, this could be a +P as well.
This should have the effect of encouraging players to defend all the empire instead of just the bits that are easily defended, and punish mindless expansionism in a realistic way. It should also tempt players to go for a really big victory and weigh the possible risks of that.
Perhaps this could be tested at some point to see how it plays? I think overall it will cause P totals to go up, but there's also increased possibilities to lose P if you are overstretched. I don't believe the current mechanisms are severe enough in that respect.
This never seems to go higher than 1, and usually times out after a while, usually all happening in peacetime from what I've experienced. So most of the time, it's irrelevant.
It should go up 1 after every major victory, the more so if the VP ratio is high e.g. > 2:1 or something. Conversely it should drop after defeats. This is in addition to event-based changes.
What does it do anyway?
2. Prestige from battles.
Why is the gain never more than 1 or 2 even after a heroic victory? The clear incentive for gamey-ness is to sink maybe 1-3 large enemy units and then run away so you can get another 2P next battle, which is how I suspect some of the very high P results being logged by players are obtained. This is highly unrealistic and there is no reward for inflicting a crushing defeat instead of an ordinary one--quite the opposite.
My suggestion is to scale the P granted in line with the VP ratio, like morale, and conversely, lose P for 'unable to challenge' in a sea area. Where the enemy is unable to challenge, this could be a +P as well.
This should have the effect of encouraging players to defend all the empire instead of just the bits that are easily defended, and punish mindless expansionism in a realistic way. It should also tempt players to go for a really big victory and weigh the possible risks of that.
Perhaps this could be tested at some point to see how it plays? I think overall it will cause P totals to go up, but there's also increased possibilities to lose P if you are overstretched. I don't believe the current mechanisms are severe enough in that respect.