[Mardagg]

[quote=fantasma;723253]but what about late game with limited gems? You'd probably see dragged out stalemates until somebody lucks in keeping a game-winning global up? Everybody is forced to invest in blood? Castling every province to keep the defense bonus and get spawning summons everywhere?

QUOTE]

You would see....diversity!

And about limited gems...e.g. 200 gems per turn should be still enough for lot of end game action+ you can play bigger maps or increase magic sites if you want more.

-Games may last longer on average,but since the turns take less time to play without microing gem gens,thats ok imo.
-Blood isnt nearly as game breaking as having say 300+astral income per turn.Skipping Blood,or only going very small into it, is perfectly viable imo.Also ,as i said earlier,if more players compete for Blood,Blood becomes weaker bc of the limited summons+you cant alchemize it.
-Game winning globals are very tough to cast without clams.
You would risk to be a lot behind in other areas to do that.
Dont forget,u can still alchemize your other gems for astral if you have to dispel that nasty global,the opponent just put up.
-tartarian commanders will be fewer in numbers,bc wishing for the chalice will be tough,and GoH will only be possible for good nature nations.
-National troops will be more useful in end game since everyone has less powerful magic troops.
-Expansion will probably be more important right from the start,since more provinces=more gems.
Waging war early will become more profitable again,but turtling still remains an option because of superior research.
-Players losing a war and wishing for armageddon before going AI wont be seen.