Will be giving it a go next week at work, thanks again.
I wonder if people are worried that it's removing a bit of the game for them, if you know what I mean?
That said, a post to that effect would be all that's required. We're not all the same after all.
When I suggested "a post to that effect" I was only suggesting that it would be good if other forum users posted you some feedback whatever their view. I am not someone who would ever attempt to alter another persons view just because it did not match my own. I do hope you have not taken any offence when there was no intention to do so.
Valentino's tools that I have used so far are all automations of calculations most players are constantly making at either an exact or intuitive level. You may not always choose to use his tools -- it is a bit inconvenient to have Excel at hand for some of us, but I could not imagine them detracting from the game. They basically provide convenient ways to get elementary facts; they do not take decision making from the player.
Now it is the case that there are ideas Valentino and I are working on, that if brought to full fruition, might ruin the game (e.g. finding the ideal distribution of certain classes of cards in one's hand), but I think this is akin to those who seek the perfect chess opening that will always force a win -- in hundreds of years, no such thing has been found, but chess theory has been tremendously enriched by their efforts. And, honestly, card distribution is a factor in the creation of every hand -- we are simply bringing mathematical tools into its consideration.
One of the things I think we all appreciate about Valentino is his willingness to openly share his ideas, discoveries, and, yes strategies. Very few players are as open or as willing to give up their deck ideas. There are many wonderfully helpful Spellcraft players if you ask on a one to one basis, but few who will be as public with their suggestions.
Unless I'm sorely mistaken, a simple post that was intended provide positive feedback for Valentino's efforts seems to have descended into some kind of teacher/pupil finger wagging offensive. Well fair enough if that's the way you like it. I shall not be posting again, goodbye.
I'm sorry if I offended you. I did not mean this as an attack on (or even a defensive reaction to) your post. You asked a question that is certainly a viable and important one. It is possible to make the game so mechanical that people cease to enjoy it. And it is certainly conceivable (although I don't think it possible) that analysis would reveal an "unbeatable" strategy that ruins the game - and I would expect the goblins to immediately address such an occurrence with changes that fixed the problem should it occur.
My first response was simply to address you concern with my belief that, while some people may not appreciate Valentino's tool, I don't think it would spoil the game for anyone.
My second post was not a reaction to your post at all -- it was intended as simply expressing appreciation that Valentino so openly shares his ideas.
If I failed to accurately convey that with my posts, blame me -- not the forum. You are a valuable contributor, and we need more of those.