That was a predictable response. In my opinion, extreme scenarios were presented. The last time I played Tower against Necropolis, battles with hordes of a hundred zombies in the first three days were quite common. And you have to fight Master Gremlins 5-6 times – and that requires a lot of maneuvering...
It's clear that the timer affects the balance of the Castles, and it's hard to argue with that. For example, in WT, the strongest Castle in classic control (4000+500) is Swamp; Inferno and Fortress are also very strong, but in short control, these Castles drop significantly because they have very long battles, both in terms of the number of actions and their complexity. Instead, Castles with simple battle mechanics and good DPS on their main units come to the fore.
But no one is particularly worried about this – so what if the balance shifts a bit? And this is for WT(!), where the balance of the Castles is considered a value, one of the guidelines in designing the gameplay.
For SoD, where there was no balance of Castles and there won't be, what difference does it make where it moves?
But the Miner adds extra time to battles with hordes of golems, while Tower loses such battles... and therefore doesn't engage in dubious battles without a significant advantage.
Earlier in the text, Kober wrote that it's harder to execute complex strategies with a short timer. That's a very accurate observation; in fact, with a short timer, the strength of Castles in general is leveled out; more powerful Castles don't have enough time to execute everything they can.
Yes, sometimes there are situations where a lot of time is needed to get out of a difficult position. It's just that these situations are generally rare; more often, a difficult situation saves time, simply because of the small number of actions available to the player.