This comment is inspired by the knowledge raiding question, but not related specifically too it, so I will mention it here:
Why the resistance to both parties? If one crowd wants knowledge raiding to the more automated in the late game, and another wants it to require more attention and be more difficult why can't both be appeased?
Personally I rarely have anyone to play with so it's mostly a single players experience. When it comes to single player, why is my playing the same way as everyone else more important that playing with the mechanics I consider most fun? Or more simply put, if they don't like something, they don't have to use it.
I've applied this to knowledge, but it can be applied to many game principles.
Well, this boils down to the fact that this is a game, not a freeform blob of clay. In other words, it needs to have some sort of coherent design, rather than being a "meh, do whatever you want" sort of thing. It ceases to be much of a game if you make it too amorphous.
But more specifically, this is a strategy game: people will use things that are most advantageous in order to win. If there is something unbalanced, people will abuse it and lose interest. I certainly would. It's something we all do, and it sort of shoots us in the foot if the game designers aren't watching out for us. That's why people lose interest in unbalanced games, because it's no fun to play without "tactic A" if you know that you can just win by using "tactic A" if you really have to.
Generally I try to create as much opportunities for player freedom as possible. However, in no way am I designing this game by committee, and I'm making the best decisions (and/or taking the best suggestions) that I think will lead to the best game health in the long term, for everyone. That means that not everyone is going to like every decision made, and that's something that game designers just have to get used to. The typical game designer response seems to be to just stop talking to players at all (or never talk to them in the first place), but that isn't something I want to do.
Why doesn't an orange taste like a strawberry? Well, because it's an orange. If you prefer strawberries, eat strawberries. If there aren't any strawberries around, that isn't the fault of the orange makers. That might sound combative, but I don't mean it that way. It's simply a fact that there are way more of you guys than there are of us here at Arcen, and that Feature A that most people love still might be reviled by some minority. Our job as responsible game designers is to act based on our professional judgement, rather than just following the ever-changing whims of the crowd. That said, the crowd raises a lot of great points, and often is full of wonderful suggestions, so it's not like we ignore the crowd, either.
In short, it's a fine line to walk, and we do the best we can to let everyone have their own personal favorite type of experience, but the overall health of the game comes first (no exploits or game-breaking easy-wins). Someone is always going to be unhappy with something, and that's just something I've had to resign myself to. Like I said, we do the best we can.
