Starting to find minor complaints about the game.
It seems that speed is the main/possibly only thing that really matters according to rank. I've found I can be meticulous and careful and not get anyone wounded, take out all the enemy aces, destroy all their tanks, capture all the camps and get a piss poor rank. Whereas if I run in guns blazing losing people left and right, ignoring aces, camps and tanks so long as I get it done quickly I get the highest rank possible. That really irks me, seems to favor haphazard playing instead of keeping everyone alive. I know there are bonuses for keeping people alive and destroying tanks and aces, but they're still so small so as to offset the poor rank you'd get by going out of your way to do it.
The second thing is related. If I'm not mistaken, the experience given out by rank seems a conflicted design. You did a mission really well so you get more experience to level up your squad. The fact that you did really well, sorta lends to the fact that you don't really need to level up your people. If you didn't do so well (or just took your time) you get less experience, which, while I can understand in a real world point of view, sorta screws the player, if they had a genuinely difficult time giving them less experience only dooms them to do poorly again. Whereas if you had an easy time of things it allows things to get easier. Surely there must be a better way to motivate people to do better. Like maybe extra cash or something.
I might be wrong on both accounts here. But even if I'm not I'm still having too much fun to really care much about either of these.
