Quote:
Originally Posted by Burnsaber
I have no delusions about the change, it's a big nerf. But I'd rather make a too weak of a nation than too strong, especially when thinking of the first MP game. As for general "power level", the only thing I know for sure at the moment is that I don't want this nation to be as strong as Itza. I've alwyas disliked "Pythium" level powernations.
|
This is obviously personal philosophy, but I'm always much more worried about a nation too weak than one too strong. Especially for multiplayer. If a nation is too strong, you can gang up on it. But if a nation is too weak, not much can be done for it (and it won't get played). And as boring as turtling might be, I think it's far more boring to be constantly rushed/attacked because everyone knows you're playing a weak nation.
I don't see either Itza or Pythium being anywhere near too strong, but again that's more personal philosophy. I just see a nation that is upper-mid in power level getting used a lot more than one that's lower in power level. We need more Pythium, C'tis (who I think is really strong MA), etc and less Ulm, Malacha, etc.
More to the new version, I can understand reducing the PD, and also changing the troops. But I think the runesmith nerfs are a bit much. More gold (when gold's already tight), more encumbrance, and less paths don't nearly do enough to offset the small research boost. Also, with all castles being so expensive now, your research will lag quite a bit, and recruiting non-caster commanders puts you at an even greater disadvantage.