<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by CyberViper:
I do have to say that I dissagree a little with your theory on atrifacts and resources. I love maps that have an abundance of resources. Not because I get alot of reasources, but because of the principle: _"I chose for my hero to go down this path, and look at all this stuff that I found. If I had gone down another path, would I have had this much success?"_ <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Ok, I agree you about what you mean with the crossroad point, but that same situations happen on a map scarce of resources, but with an important difference: if the map has a lot of resources, mines will become almost useless; in a scarce one, mines will remain being a key, among other ones, of the game.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>It plays into the idea that you are at war, and that events can change the tide of war. Like if i need 6 or 7 more sulfur to build a dragon's cave and i randomly find a pile of sulfur in my path, I'm like "YES!! I FREAKIN ROCK". It takes the game to the next level. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I agree, simple right events can, and should, change the tide of war, but if there's a lot of resources they could be found elsewhere, so the exploration phase and taking mines would become obsolete. The game would become into a "go, go, go for the highest level" and there won't be the medium phase, which it should take some time (like on H1 or H2), when you had to fight with the indispensable low level troops and take measures about dividing them in order to get more in the lesser time, and the more important, make up one's mind about what will be better: save money in order to build the highest level or use it to get more troops in order to fight for more resources, in order to get the first thing, or maybe attack the enemy players.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>And quickly, about the artifacts...I like really strong artifacts. It can change the tide of war, which is the whole point behind artifacts. That's why they are called "artifacts", because they have great value (some more than others). And usually its not unfair because you have to defeat strong guardians to get the artifact, it's not like it's just handed to you. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well, the question is not if it's fair or not, it's clearly fair because the one who gets the super-artifacts earlier is often the best player, because it's the one who is able to defeat the guardian before the enemies (probably with an army which others won't dare to attack with). The question is that after that event, the game is over, because if the best player gets the super-ART it will be almost impossible to win him/her because, by on one hand, cos he/she is better; and by the other one, cos he/she have a huge advantage, the super-ART, which will allow him/her to get the other super-ART's and killing High Guardians in order to power the hero 'till the game is finally sentenced before a final battle.
Now I ask: "Why are we playing for?"
My answer: For an uncertain battle where we could find some fun.
With super-ART, and super-structures which power up a lot the hero, the final battles would be clearly pre-decided and there won't be a need for them, at least you want to lose your time.