This has the exact same result - seriously effects long-term decisions
which players have already made and can't undo. At least, as far as
I can see. Which one of the two proposals above is 'better' seriously
depends on rate and N, and also is subjectively dependant on whether or
not a faction choses/chose to pursue a magic-emphasizing strategy.
If we change NP allocation during Oly II game 1, somebody's going to get
hurt. We have to accept this.
> David desJardins
(As a biased player of the game, I have to wonder why everybody thinks
there are too many NPs out there. It certainly doesn't look that way
to me. NPs are the single most limiting factor on my game play, just
as they were intended to be)