Titchener et al. (2005) asked whether non-simple T-prescriptions can achieve larger T-complexity than simple T-prescriptions for infinitely many finite values of the maximum codeword length. We answer this question affirmatively for every fixed alphabet of size at least two. In fact, we prove a stronger upper-envelope statement: for infinitely many lengths $N$, there exists a valid non-simple T-prescription of exact maximum codeword length $N$ whose T-complexity exceeds the best value attainable by any simple prescription with maximum codeword length at most $N$. Hence the unrestricted exact-length maximum over prescriptions is strictly larger than the corresponding simple exact-length maximum for infinitely many $N$. The proof is elementary. Once a copy pattern has been used, it cannot be selected again. Thus simple prescriptions with more and more steps must use ever more distinct words, which forces the minimal simple length thresholds to have infinitely many strict upward jumps. At each such jump, changing the last copy factor of a minimal simple prescription from $1$ to $2$ yields a valid non-simple prescription, thereby increasing T-complexity by $\log_2 3-1$ while staying below the next simple threshold.