The most dreadful (random) event? - Page 10

Loren · #91 September 2nd, 2008, 07:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chrispedersen

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edi

Bad events are the whole bloody point of misfortune. If you take it, then you run the risk of being ruined by that misfortune early on, tough luck. Even if it does cost you the game in the first few turns. On the other hand, with Misfortune 3, you just got 120 points extra to spend on dominion, magic paths and/or other scales which should presumably offset the problems of the misfortune scale.

Misfortune is already one of the most widely used scales, so why the hell should it be nerfed just so people can feel they can safely take it? Can anyone give me any actual viable reason why this should be?

The best solution I can see is increasing the maximum number of possible events per turn, as that would scale both luck and misfortune a lot better, especially in large games.

The problem is edi, as I tried to point out before, is that other people pay the price for *you* taking unluck. I'm not talking scales.

If a player takes misfortune 3.. and gets knocked out of the game on turn 1 - or even in the first year - it unbalances the game for the remaining players.

That's what I've been saying, also.

Not only does it mess the game up for the rest of the players but it actually hurts them worse than it hurts you. You're quickly out and can devote your time to a new one.

Ironhawk · #92 September 2nd, 2008, 08:36 PM

Tho I highly doubt this will ever get implemented, the way to make Luck/Misf scales really work is this:

Include the turn number as a variable to the severity of the events.

So you take every positive or negative effect that an event has and multiply it by some amount of the turn. This would prevent Misfortune from being such a point-mine as bad events in the late game would be REALLY BAD. Imagine a gold loss event of 500gp or so! On the other side of the coin it would also provide a boost to Luck in that it would provide more benefit to a large nation once the events-per-turn limit was reached.

Edratman · #93 September 2nd, 2008, 09:16 PM

Good idea Ironhawk. A minor permutation would be to step the events based on turns, such as level 1 for turns 1 to 5, level 2 for 6 to 15, etc.

Arralen · #94 September 3rd, 2008, 06:06 AM

The problem is not the number of turns, but the fixed (max) number of events: If you have 40 provinces in the late game, you still get only .. what was it? 4? .. events ..
If max number of events would be dependant on the number of provinces owned (e.g. max 1 event per every full 5 provinces) you would be a bit safer in the first turns, but into much more hurt in the late game .. .

And, o.c., there should not be any random events and mercs during the first 6 turns (5? 10?) of the game .. they can only be unbalancing, therefore ...

Edratman · #95 September 3rd, 2008, 06:39 AM

I suspect the limit on the number of events is a spacing issue, ie, there are only 4 slots allocated for events. Maybe it can be changed, maybe not.

This is based on the fact that I've discovered other limits in the course of modding. One example is that there are 5 lines available for modded sites. The game just ignores any commands beyond 5 lines.

chrispedersen · #96 September 4th, 2008, 05:54 PM

Disabling game ending misfotrune in the first few turns was also what I was suggesting.

I also agree that the limit of 4 bad (or good) events really is necessary for misfortune to scale.

However, if the coding really is stuck on 4 events, Then I would suggest a slightly easier modification.

Generate random events based on the true incidence. Aka an empire of 30 territories might generate 5 bad events and 2 good ones.

Misfortune 3 would ensure that the 3 Worst events and 1 random event of the remaing 5 gets through. With 2 bad events and 2 good events remaing.. it would be 50/50 what kind of event you got.

Misfortune 2 .. would ensure that 2 worst events and 2 random events of the remaining 5 would get through.

How is this an improvement? rather than the first 4 chronolgoical events occur, it means that the the worst (best) events occur, according to your luck scale.

Zeldor · #97 September 4th, 2008, 06:04 PM

Yeah, right. Where do you live? Expect what can be done. Increasing event limit is the easiest thing to do and if it can't be done in dom3 then surely some more complicated ideas like your are even less possible. I at least hope that they will tell us when they start making dom4, so we can make a nice wishlist.

Arralen · #98 September 4th, 2008, 06:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zeldor

Increasing event limit is the easiest thing to do and if it can't be done in dom3 then surely some more complicated ideas like yours are even less possible.

You might be right with this one ...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zeldor

I at least hope that they will tell us when they start making dom4, so we can make a nice wishlist.

.. and there is/was a wishlist somewhere.

ALAS, there will be no DOM4 .. they told us already, several times !!

JimMorrison · #99 September 4th, 2008, 09:14 PM

[quote=Arralen;636402]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zeldor

ALAS, there will be no DOM4 .. they told us already, several times !!

Not so at all. They just said that it's not the project that they are currently working on. They wanted something new and different, can hardly blame them. I think Dom4 will be better if they focus on something else for awhile, learn even more, see even more, become slightly more godlike.

Endoperez · #**100** September 5th, 2008, 02:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zeldor

Yeah, right. Where do you live? Expect what can be done. Increasing event limit is the easiest thing to do and if it can't be done in dom3 then surely some more complicated ideas like your are even less possible.

You are right in that it probably isn't easier to create, but it seems like it might be easier to incorporate into the existing codebase. As such, it'd be a good suggestion if it's difficult to just increase the amount of events - as Chrispedersen said.