The second game in this series improves over the original in some respects and retains many things that make the first game fun. However, there are some lingering issues that make for interesting discussion of game and narrative design.
Please pardon the provocative title. There is a bit of debate about what exactly is game balance. Balance is a subjective assessment, similar to fun, but while balance may be subjective, there are concrete measurements that can be applied to determine how closely a design aligns to that subjective goal. In a word: metrics . For myself, I want a player to feel like their skill and perhaps some luck, contributed to their victory or defeat. I hate the feeling of realizing that something in a game is even moderately unbalanced. If the game is severely unbalanced, it reduces the game to an activity. For example, if a game has players select from unique abilities at the start (like a faction), but you realize that your faction is unbalanced, the game is no longer about skill and luck, but rather the choice you make at the beginning of the game. In which case, why play the rest of the game?