I deleted it because I got my math wrong. I went back and looked at the numbers and recordings of distance with Thursars and Veela, and saw that Thursars are by far the best runners which changed my perspective.
for me the balance with this has a lot to do with how they balancee Thursars and if they will remain the way they are. Stam useage difference when running is (stam usage per second)
Thur = 4.8 weapon in and 6.35 weapon out
Veela = 5.66 weapon in 7.46 weapon out
Veela have around 2 stam more per second regen and 1.5ish seconds when using active clade. its 351 stam compared to 381 however. When you factor it all in with good running strategy Thursar still comout slightly on top by a few meters and that changed my idea of how much the Alv have to sacrifice and how pure mage kinda feels a better option in many ways.
At the end of the day I really don't know if I personally feel that is a good balance or not. I feel like if Thursars have a stam useage reduction of say 7 with weapon out for example not 6.35 that would help. It also depends on how much damange a Og spear, or crone sword/axe do. I could see a world in where pure veela hybrids are quite decent in certain areas, but their niche is a fine one. If Thursars lose their stam reduction for all stam usage and only have it apply to weapon swings like I suspect it is meant to be then things change quite a bit. They would lose their effective 90 stam advatage over humans, 45 effective stam over alvs and its probably like 60ish effective more stam then Oghs (haven't tested them). I use to think Thursars should have this to make them worth playing as they lose out alot in non-combat stuff but I'm not sure anymore because I feel that is what is undermining Veela hybrids more.
Idk I see the stam and speed as a bigger balance issue over Veela then the magic change but I don't feel super strongly that the magic change is for the better and I wouldn't cry if Veela hybrids went back to what they were
Post post edit:
Very much this ^ SV have got better, but I really wish they would provide statements as to WHY they changed what they changed and what they would like to achieve behind it. This helps us help them as well because we have a lot of experience between us all, obviously we're all a bit bias but it would be much better then the current in the dark on what situation we have. They're going to really need to think about how they explain these things to new players because it is going to be a massive point offrustration for people who have to reroll. Player made guides will help, but this time around when the game lunches they will need a very comprehensive explanation between skills and attributes effects, and how that will practically look in game.
Post post edit 2: Actually another point, this kinda brings humans into the middle ground yet again, because 3 part Tin/Sud with Khur/Kal or 2 part Tin/Sud 2 part Khur/Kal with slight str changes to the ladder combos give a 50/50 int psy, still solid fighting stats and good clade bonus to well round fighters who are literally solid in the middle, not great at anything but not weak to anything, they would reduce the effectiveness of Bulge/Dex Sheevra, and if you wanted to you train just enough for utility magic. I don't hate this as it kinda makes combat super interesting with groups needing to either triple down and have like pure races in a group or races that compliment each other, or heavy diversity.
If you play around with that thorey in your head you can kinda see a lot of rock/paper/sissors happening between races, stats, and skills. I think sometimes we're so stuck in MO1 archetypes we forget to look at the hole and not just the nail.
