my next proposal: “the net doesn’t count as a player except maybe for one rule….” ;)

I don’t see why Credits would suddenly turn into victory points…

I would agree with something like “if no one wins, then one extra cycle begins”

Koen’s suggestion is much better, or even a sudden death round for the tied candidates.

first off, the idea that “power and only power is victory points” is silly. This is a nomic. The point of the game is that we define the rules as we go. Just because up until this point credits haven’t factored into the endgame conditions doesn’t mean they shouldn’t continue to.

Secondly, its certainly not an unheardof mechanic that money breaks ties. (see Puerto Rico)

There’s nothing wrong with the mechanic per se, but quite a few of us are power rich and credit poor right now and would rather not have our goals suddenly change.

your goals are not changing. you still want power. but if you wind up with the same amount of power, I’d rather reward the guy who still kept some credits than the gut who burnt everything.

I’d argue that the guy who kept some credit was inefficient and should have got more power out of his credits, whereas someone who successfully burnt everything to have the more Power he can played well.
Besides, why would Credits be more valuable than Marines?

@Koen: A, There is not inherently good strategy - it’s based on how we want the game to work. I prefer to have a tiebreaker than an indefinite end.
B. Fair point.

As I stated, councilmen are last because they are already used. Then marines, because I don’t want to encourage stockpiling marines.

“most credits” is clearly better than “least credits”. Doing least credits helps remove strategy - it encourages you to just spend everything and burn credits on other institution just to get them down.

“it encourages you to just spend everything and burn credits on other institution just to get them down.”
Exactly - which is what they are and have always been for: being spent. How is that any less strategic than “I’ll just accumulate a lot of money and never use it”?

I struggled during the whole dynasty with very few credits and still manage to be first in Power. I don’t see why I should be punished for that. As I see it, Credits are long-term rewarding resources, whereas Power are immediate victory points. When the game comes to an end, if someone has failed to convert their Credits into Power, why should the remaining Credits still be worth points?

And why would stockpiling Marines be less useful than stockpiling Credits? All dynasty we have considered that Marines were better than Credits. Using Marines as a tiebreaker for Credits would punish someone who succeeded in Influencing the Legion or the Rebels late in the game, and reward those who failed.

Because credits are the “base unit” of currency. you convert them into other stuff. Having the most credits means your most set to go forward. If someone gets the same amount of power while keeping more credits they clearly played better and would be all set to win if the dynasty continued.