Jan 8th 2013, 16:07:15
Are we just trying to define strategies here, or are we trying to make the argument that playing one way is somehow more "honorable" or somehow more legitimate than the other?
Is landtrading frowned upon because it was a game change implemented by someone other than THE GREAT MEHUL PATEL himself? If so, that's stupid.
True, nearly every time changes are implemented in the game, they're a bit overpowered. Ghost acres/landtrading may have been, and then it was somewhat nerfed. You can still do it well with some effort.
Is landtrading frowned upon because it "takes no skill"? You're right. Bottomfeeding takes no skill either. Camping news waiting for DRs to wear off isn't a skill, it's a bad habit.
The theocracy gov't was no different. It was created, it was overpowered, and then gov't bonuses were tweaked to create a bit of an even playing field.
We saw last reset -- admittedly in a great reset for techers -- what the ceiling was for a smart techer, and what it was for a landtrading farmer/casher. The landtraders got smoked. A few top 10s from the smart ones, but in the end there was no competition for top spots.
This reset, dirty landtraders might dominate the top 10, but probably only because the smart techers were warring. It is what it is.