We'll burn that bridge when we get there, Robert.

This one isn't over yet.
I think that subtlety is unnecessary depending on the god that you are...as the god of nature, things ought to evolve naturally and subtly, however when playing as the God of Terror things were often frightening, abrupt, and very un-subtle.
The trick is for the God to understand that when the time for smiting comes, these changes need to be (1)intelligent, (2)relevant, and (3)fun.
Examples of Previous, Excellent Changes
-- When Hannibal decided to disobey the Mountain God, and kill him instead (!) for blocking his military conquests with a mountain chain, the god in question allowed himself to fade and even took his mountains with him - unfortunately, these mountains were something of a backbone and a peninsula of his crashed into the ocean, taking his second-best city with it. However, the area that had been blocking his mighty conquests had now turned into mineable materials. The update was
relevant, it was both
punishment and
dynamic, and it was not Cataclysmic.
The format of the game has improved, but I feel as if the original spirit of the game is and will always be "sea of chaos". Unfortunately, (With the strange exception of Paulus

) the player rarely ever listened to the gods and the god would punish them for not doing what they asked. Then, when the player would continue to ignore them despite punishment, a god would get angry and go "ka. .. .. .. .YOU!" with barbarians or massive, irrelevant terrain changes. I myself am guilty of that in this particular DI, and after I realized that I decided to switch to international politics to affect the player.
Extreme changes aren't necessarily bad. Making them interesting is often enough to soothe the wound you've created, but "haha your island of gold is now an island of ice because you killed the NPC I told you not to even though it was the best choice and you were already dedicated to that before I even joined the game!" (but...you're the god of like elephants...) is bad.