It doesn't show the depth of my experience with this game because a person can have a city on each server, more if they wanted...
I feel that rank & score DO show the depth of a player's experience with this game. If you've played previously & discovered this game so long ago, did you participate here in the forum? Did you play or post under different names? I ask because this is relevant to whether your comments now have weight ~ at least in my book. It is a natural human quality to give more significance to someone who has more experience, has been around longer, has seen the changes & updates that have already occurred. Currently, your comments that are posted as a new member (of the forum) and your lower score & ranking make it appear as though you have little knowledge to back up your claims about the game or the other players who play it.
I think you are right that we all could have expected more from a company established in 2003, but that things are what they are now. I begrudge no one or no company from learning something as they go & then making adjustments. But that is also true of myself - I learn as I go & then make adjustments, and right now I'm learning that my experiences as a longer-term/more advanced player are continually dismissed both by the devs & Inno reps. Additionally, I find quite a few comments here on the forum from players who are new to the forum or who even look like they are new to the game (based on rank, points & city size and where they are on the Tech Tree) and are now trying to admonish others who are farther along, been playing longer & even reading the forums longer.
That is suspicious to me. I don't mean that it's suspicious that some people like the changes even though others don't - this game isn't a one size fits all & there are bound to be aspects that some like & some don't. I mean it's suspicious to read some really vitriolic comments about how us old fogeys "played wrong", "went too far", "were overeager", had little to no understanding of how city games are "supposed" to work, are "whining" any time we share a negative opinion (even though that's exactly what this forum asks for - feedback), and on and on.
Lionsmane, one thing we agree on, although we interpret it differently, I think ~
There was always an underlying need that was not stated to balance the three as you played.
Of course this is true based upon the boundaries that the game presented. For example, you cannot keep building houses or other buildings unless you balance your culture - the game does not let you build or upgrade something new if you don't have enough culture to do so. Lots of examples like this in the game - however, the key words to me is that the game had these boundaries in place & players learned them & adjusted to them in the beginning. Also from the beginning, the game encouraged scouting, fighting & collecting relics. How did they do this? By offering repeated quest lines that rewarded it, by not putting any boundaries in place to prevent it, and by making reaching other neighbors a bonus - ie, once you 'discover' them, you can trade with them without a fee and give each other visits that reward players with coins & supplies.
So now, they want to change it. Okay, I don't love this idea, but I can understand it to some extent. However, the way it's been handled by the devs & moderators here, the lack of feedback, the dismissal of any nay-sayers as telling us it was our fault to begin with, the out & out criticisms that unhappy players are facing if they dare to speak up, the fallout of the high-level (and low level) players that are quitting over it ~ all of this combines to leave a very negative taste in a lot of players mouths, and frankly, the suspicion I spoke about above too.
Then again, maybe I am just a natural-born skeptic.