Possibly just quoting the full context above explains it? If you reach a situation where you're keeping around one or two old cities that aren't producing materials anymore, and you don't have enough materials to build a new one (even if you do have a settler), then there is nothing you can do except wait for an upgrade or hope to enter a combat and get Magical Bounty to raise funds. That can mean many, many turns of hitting "Next Day"--or more likely, just quitting and starting again. To avoid the lameness of this, a fast-forward mechanism should kick in that would auto advance the game at a rapid pace until you get an upgrade, enter combat, or some other event of interest happens. I think that the pace of the game would probably be too slow if you had to wait for each march to a lair to complete. Also, there is a certain risk to sending out a bunch of strikes at once: if you lose a bunch of units in one battle and have to face a different nest in the same turn, you won't have a chance to build up. (Or even across turns, you may not have the materials you need to build up your units.) Maybe training a unit should cost a turn--that would increase the consequences of not planning your combat schedule well. A couple people have mentioned the difficulty from the deck getting bigger. That's pretty tough to verify in this version due to the city upgrade bug, but in the last version it wasn't that much of an issue, and without being forced to take valor and grit (both of which are more useful in the latest version anyway), I'm just not convinced that the game gets that much harder due to deck bloat--not if you're playing to manage it, anyway (using keeps, policing, choosing cards according to a strategy rather than willy-nilly). The fact that combat is a bit harder in this version might mean that deck management is automatically harder, due to there being more strife from lost units. But I think the jury is still out on this increasing difficulty thing, at least for me. I like the idea of monster lairs spreading blight and destroying the (potential) economy. To address EnDevero's point, maybe VP from combats should be based on the disparity between your army and the enemy's. That way, the imbalance in points early vs late would be that throughout the game you try to do more with fewer units, and only up your army if you need to. Early on, you might try to do this in an extreme way--like with one unit--to maximize score. (There would need to be a mechanism to disband units, though, since the game currently assumes that a larger army is always better.) This would also mean that policing would in effect trade scoring potential for a cleaner deck.