bchlax944 wrote:
Thanks for responding. I wasn't being passive agressive at all. I was stating that in my plays, I hadn't noticed it as an issue. If I wanted to say that you haven't played the game enough to notice this issue, I would have actually said that. Supporting my reason for being "right" doesn't need to be an attack at yours, or proof that you are "wrong". I'm actually somewhat frustrated myself that you would just assume my comment to be an attack and passive aggressive. I feel that by saying "I don't agree with the point your making/I haven't noticed it as a concern" has very much to do with the point your making, but you disagree, and I understand that. No one has said that you don't have sufficient exerpience to notice that things are worth more in one situation than another, simply that if you played more, perhaps you wouldn't feel it to be an issue, as you'd see another side of things (and, for the record, I wasn't even the one who stated that, Chris was).
I wouldn't worry too much about it, bchlax. You've been entirely reasonable on this thread. Also, OP seems pretty touchy, given that two (2) people disagreeing with him appears to be enough to drive him to abandon the entire BGG community. Rather silly, IMO; BGG users are definitely on the nice side when it comes to Internet discussions. Reading YouTube comment boards would probably make petercox spontaneously combust.
As for the discussion at hand, those knowledge tiles are definitely powerful, but not so much that they require tweaking. In order for them to be truly abused in a 2-P game, you'd have to 1) actually see them show up at all, 2) get them early enough that you can base your strategy around them, and 3) be playing with an opponent who's oblivious to what you're doing and not competing for goods. I'm not saying that it never happens, but it doesn't come up frequently enough in my experience to warrant house rules.