I don't think "balance" is one of the design goals of this game, except in the sense of making sure to sufficiently simulate expected upsides and downsides. So I don't think "increase costs to offset power of strategy" quite makes sense. On the other hand, the political capital generation and costs system is seemingly the most gamified and least "simulated" system, and thus the most obvious candidate for ideologically designing the right answer to this puzzle game, which is sort of what you're hinting at.
morsesans
Recent community posts
just launched this game & trying to get a handle on it. really excited.
my first feedback is that a clarification between changing something by x% and by x percentage points is crucially needed. I see "change the amount of land under protection by +30%", and when I click it, it says "the amount of land under protection will change from 10% to 40%". this is an enormous discrepancy, and not knowing whether you can trust the numbers makes the comprehension curve a lot worse.
Incredible game. My main feedback is that this really doesn't need to be positioned as a "rougelike" and a "deckbuilder". These tags are at best true in a really flimsy and uninteresting way. Those genre tags are not really relevant to this game, and the game is not really relevant to those genres.
Or, maybe the full release will justify it more, I don't know

sweet game