Vote

[Warhammer]

Originally Posted by quantum_mechani

It has been said the most recent CB actually goes in the direction of reducing possible strategic options, but this seems a difficult interpretation to take. Whatever there is not to like about the hammer change, it is hard to argue that not requiring 3-4 e on a non-e nation's pretender doesn't present more options, or that not needing to beeline right for SDRs with a blood strategy doesn't open up new possibilities. It's the fact that these so called 'options' were indispensable that causes the difficulties, and while it's possible that changing them can cascade into making other options less attractive, these are all presumably independently addressable problems.

I disagree with the leap you're making here. Again, I think a lot of this is due to fixating on one type of game. The large games make hammers much more important. In a smaller game, hammers are much less important. The mage time in making more hammers over the first have a decreasing rate of return. I am currently playing a small 55 province map against two opponents, and I am crafting all I can afford to do with two hammers. I have too many more important things for my pretender to do (only one with a lot of earth). I took the earth for the bless, not for the hammer forging.

Now, if we were playing a larger game, I would need more hammers. I would have more time, so any turn spent crafting hammers has a lower opportunity cost and a higher payoff. So I would consider trading for hammers or taking a pretender with earth.

I mean is anyone calling for a nerf of Niefelheim because they win duels against Marverni on a map like Dogfight? No.

The other side of the coin is games where you don't get high earth income? I've played games where I needed something and didn't get it. Are we going to ramp up gems just because I got an unlucky draw? No we accept that. Again, I feel this falls into the same category.