[Scott Hebert]

Having read the arguments...

I'd have to say Norfleet has a very persuasive argument, yet I notice a problem in it.

Norfleet, you say, on the one hand, that it is appropriate to be able to give up use of a resource now in return for a greater resource later. And I agree with you. This is the concept behind investment, and it should work.

However, you also make the comment that Water gems are useful for very little besides making Clams. While I don't have the experience with the game to make this assessment (Sea King's Court seems at least decent for water gems.), I will believe your assessment.

When you take both of these statements together, though, you end up with a conundrum. If Water Gems have little use besides Clams, you're not losing anything to invest in them. IOW, you're not really losing 'present resources' to gain 'future resources', since those 'present resources' aren't useful in and of themselves.

Do you see the issue here?

Bayushi Tasogare