Quote:
Boron said:
[They are not underpriced at all .
20 turns without a dwarfen hammer , 14 with a dwarfen hammer until they reach break even point .
|
Your math is terrible. The actual break even point for a clam is 7 turns without a hammer and 5 turns with a hammer. This is because 7 pearls is worth approximately 10 water gems, imho. Pearls are vastly more useful that water gems, which is why I think this.
And converting 20 pearls back to 10 water just to make another clam is really dumb. The pearls are far better used to make items for your SCs, like resistance and luck and shrouds (if you have a decent bless effect) and skullcaps. Or for archastic record. Or used to empower towards wish if your pretender can't do it. Or building up to arcane nexus. Or any other useful things for pearls besides wasting them on converting to water.
A 5 turn payback (with hammer investment) for making a clam is just plain bad. That is why most good players make lots of pearls as they are able, whether or not they are turtling or hoarding or fighting for territory or defending their own territory. Just about every decent player does this. I know you do.
Besides, by the time someone starts targeting your scouts with lucky artillery spells, you have held your clams for such a long time that it does not hurt that much if you lose a few. I agree with Yvelina on this one, if you have 80 scouts in your capitol all with clams and no domes, then you deserve what you get.
If clams were to cost something closer to their true value, like 3WS1 as suggested by my son, then you WOULD have to consider doing something else with your water gems besides the no-brainer decision to make clams and clams and more clams. It was Norfleet who first pointed out the immense value of a cheap clam. Maybe he was cheating, but he was certainly a darn good player who understood the game even when not cheating.