Quote:
Originally Posted by qio
Quote:
Originally Posted by licker
So change your strategy...
|
You have an actual point you are trying to make?
Changing the settings affects the game. If it didn't, there wouldn't be any settings.
If you do not care what the settings are, you could be mute on the issue. If you are in favor of some modifications, you could justify the reason for making those; or simply just say what your preference would be. I see neither.
I can give you random advice that has no relevance to the issue. You should eat a lot of fiber. This is pretty much on par with your statement above.
|
My my...
A tad touchy about this?
My advice is crystal clear. This game is about more than just determining what you are good with, or what your favorite strategy is. If the game is to be played with certain settings, then you should be able to adapt to those settings.
Others have said they feel more sites makes it more fun. You have said more sites disadvantages your strategy.
I wonder which is more likely to be chosen based solely on the above?
Though it should be noted, that your strategy is only disadvantaged in a relative sense, and perhaps not at all, as you seem to think that a rainbow pretender will find 'fewer' sites than the level 0 sites you appear to feel disadvantaged by, or the 'extra' sites a nation lacking diversity will miss.
Of course the above presupposes that more gems is always an advantage. Though I'm not sure who is going to disagree with that.
I'm not sure how you gathered from my post that I was neutral on this issue anyway, but no matter, until the host asks for some kind of tally I don't see that it will matter much.