| 
			
			 
			
				December 23rd, 2009, 12:51 PM
			
			
			
		 | 
	| 
		
			
			| 
 Sergeant |  | 
					Join Date: Feb 2009 
						Posts: 282
					 Thanks: 8 
		
			
				Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
			
		
	      |  | 
    
	| 
				 Re: Exploit question 
 
	Quote: 
	
		| 
					Originally Posted by Mardagg  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.
 |  That sounds awesome, actually.  Late-game would be more different for each nation, and nations wouldn't be locked into all the same strategies.
			
			
			
			
				  |