Quote Originally Posted by avarice View Post
Firebones. We're all well aware of the fact that the thief CB op will be no more difficult than the wizard CB op.
Based on the previous responses, that is not clear at all...hence the reason Bishop mentioned it as well... and why some people keep comparing the new CB to SoM.

Quote Originally Posted by avarice View Post
The potential difficulty is only a minor issue that will (hopefully) be resolved. Personally I'm more concerned with the fact that this is likely a thievery *nerf* (less stealth = sadface), everyone will have to run high TPA to take intel effectively (it's much easier to train thieves than wizards, regardless of the twiddling you do with TDs and WTs to fix the mods for intel taking) therefore limiting strats - which we've already seen leads to an age that's not as fun as it could be since everyone plays Dwarf/Art.
See that is where people are just making blind assumptions. Now, depending on how it is implemented, it very well may be the case that people start needing more thieves to get information, but there is no guarantee that it will be that way. The proof for this is pretty obvious:

Think about your wizards. How many wizards do you need to be reasonably safe in war? Some people make due with 1 (raw), stronger kingdoms require more for "back door protection." But whatever that minimal number is (that people have for protection), it also turns out to be sufficient for most people to cast CBs. People don't load up with wizards just so they can get CBs...they get wizards [if they are smart] so that in war they are not ripped to shreds.

Similarly with thieves. Yes, it is easier to get thieves, but that does not necessarily mean people will do it. What if the 2 Raw TPA most people have is sufficient to get intel? We would have the same situation we have now..if the thieves you are already going to have will suffice for getting intel, then why would you get more? If you could, right now, train an extra wizard per acre, would you? Probably not...you probably have about as many wizards as you need for protection in war, and those suffice to do your CBs. The fact that you need wizards to get CBs has no material effect on how many wizards you have...so the argument that "wizards are different from thieves because you can train thieves immediately" is pretty weak.

So, once again, as long as Sean makes these ops easy, easy enough so that people are not compelled to get more thieves just to get intel, the effect you mention [where people book up on thieves just to get intel] won't happen.

As for the notion of "all the intel ops being on one pool," PUH-leeze. If anything, this argument goes against the point you are trying to make. Currently a heavy attacker has pretty much no need for stealth except SoM. They have to use mana to fuel all their self spells AND their cbs. This evens that out so that a non-thief, non-mage can more easily attack because he uses one pool for self spells and another for target finding.