[johan osterman]

Originally posted by apoger:
It's my game philosophy that complexity should only be added when it adds to the enjoyment of the game.

What we have to ask ourselves is:
Does having some "flavor" from the seasons add enough enjoyment to counter the hassle of having to pay attention to seasons in order to optomize your magic creatures.

Honestly I don't think so.

I also don't see any additional benefit from the slight dominion shifts due to seasons.

What I do see is arguments that four seasons make a year and thus four turns is a year and [blah blah blah] isn't realistic in a year. "This % of growth isn't realistic in a year". "My troops shouldn't have to spend all of three months to pillage a province". None of this was an issue when using "turns". Having generic turns allowes suspension of disbelief for many things. By declaring 1 turn = 1 season you have backed yourself into a design corner and must now justify things according to time.

It's only my opinion, but my opinion is that seasons added little if anything to the game, and created perception issues that haunt your game design. I think it was a bad choice.

I partially agree with you on the turns versus the months issue, there is a point in keeping turns and other similar mechanics abstract as it avoids consistancy issues. On the other hand I do think the Calendar adds flavour, and it was a feature several people requested.

Also you say that seasons are an additional optimisation hassle, frankly I do not why taking seasons into account is different or more detrimental than any number of other strategic decisions. Launching your big attack at Niefelheim in the beginning of spring in order to suffer less from the cold is, to me, both a meaningful and enjoyable strategic dedision.