Does this system encourge new players to go for broke and wager all points in first game.Or experinced player who loses everything but still maintain 100 to try and jump back up in points with a WTA bet of 100.They have nothing to lose but to keep trying.They will eventually win.This skews point system not a true reflection of ability.

Regardless of how many points you start with, if you are defeated or the game ends and you have less than 100 , you are credited with enough points to get it back you back to 100.

However, if you go into civil disorder you do not get your points back. If you then get defeated in another game, then that puts you back to 100. But if you wager all your points and go CD then you'll be stuck at zero. You might get points back when the game you are CD in ends if no one has taken over your country, but I'm not positive. Something like that anyway. In any case, don't go into civil disorder and you don't have to worry about it.

@podium, in the old days before live games, only being able to play one game at a time was pretty limiting. But now with live games I could certainly see that happening.

Personally I wish there was some limit on what percentage of your points you could bet in a single game at the lower level of points. So if you had 100 you could only bet a quarter of your points (25). But get up to 200 and you could bet half your points (100). Up to 400 and you can bet them all. So I guess I'm saying put a max bet percentage of points/400 with a minimum of 25 and maximum of 100% of your points.

I'm sure there are alot of all or nothing cowboys .Points are just an artificial measure anyways.GR is a better standard to go by.