It is not a refusal or inability to adapt that makes this an issue. It is the fact that only one approach becomes all that is valid. I often approach every game differently and if I refuse to support a setup that demands a singular approach to be employed every time, that is NOT a refusal to adapt, particularly not to an improvement. It is a refusal to accept that only one strategy has been designed to become the clearly dominant one, when the goal is that any of the opening strategies have equal validity. Oh and, rereading for deeper clarity: This is not a threat. A threat is a warning of consequence. This is simply a statement of fact that you seem to easily forget. I'm not trying to go around and destroy everything you do like it's personal. I like a lot of what you do. But where we have truly deep disagreements on what balanced design looks like, I'll try to find a compromise in between, but that doesn't mean I had to. I'm not sure what's hard to understand about that or why you would think of that as a threat. It's simply the way it is. You are on this team because I invited you and you cared to accept that invitation. I also make no demands but let you pretty much do as you see fit. I would think you might feel that's a fairly respectful environment as that's not generally how the world usually works. The matter of striking the right balance between research and production progression is really something that has been dramatically debated on this forum for a long time and I need us to shoot for something in the middle of all opinions on that subject and let the options we have let someone with a stronger opinion get what they want out of their game. It is not a non-issue and never has been and you well know that. In the very opening of the game it is a much greater item of importance than it ever is after the first few tech columns because this is all what's happening BEFORE processes can make wasted production useful. Past that point there's a lot more tolerance on this subject for variation. I may not have needed to go out to 4 columns out to address this but to create a different ramp up gradient in values I did need to go that far. The issue is really only how the first 2 columns of techs are approached, and again, I didn't even blame your design - I just changed things to correct a problem. I wish you could see that it was one, but since it was a secondary issue derivitave from your changes, you're taking it so personally you can't divorce your ego from it. Truth is, your civics are still, imo, overall an improvement. They just created a need for another area of the game to adapt, and in some ways, I was going to want to find a way to make that cost progression more like it is eventually anyhow. Hey, I'm also curious, did the palace initial stats get changed here too? Could that explain some of the massive drop in initial research as well?