Suggestions from a noob

[Kuciwalker]

I agree about very large random events.

[Solver]

Played SMAC? That had some weird random events. Some were subtle, such as an extra commerce point in a city for 10 turns, other were... not so subtle, such as an asteroid strike wiping out your city. Usually the largest one with 5 wonders.

[alva]

Originally posted by sprucemoose3311
the new guy is gone already? and without the obligitory

1. Chieftans are not allowed to do the DL dance. (J/K)
2. Only in the OT

---

I like random effects, sure they can irritate me but Enjoy the fact that something can mess up your plans, so that you have to improvise.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Solver
Played SMAC? That had some weird random events. Some were subtle, such as an extra commerce point in a city for 10 turns, other were... not so subtle, such as an asteroid strike wiping out your city. Usually the largest one with 5 wonders.

I always played with random events off

Mostly because of the large ones.

[sophist]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
I agree about very large random events.

As do I. Significant random events are frustrating because they erode skill. Significant random behavior regresses every civ towards the mean, no matter the skill with which you have played. On the other hand, minor random events don't obscure skill. These would be opportunities that are interesting, but too powerful to appear consistently. in fact, by presenting a wide array of diverse opportunities, they may make it possible for you to exert your skill with greater leverage. People with greater ability and optimism suffer less from the effects of bad luck and benefit more from the effects of good luck. It's a true fact.

[GAZ082]

Owww, the only game where events rules is in EU or any other Paradox game.

[Xorbon]

Originally posted by sophist
Significant random behavior regresses every civ towards the mean, no matter the skill with which you have played.

What's wrong with that? If you're kicking the AI's butt, then you could probably use a nice big volcano in the centre of your capital to give you a bit of a challenge.

[patcon]

I'm OK with the idea of a civil war causing a portion of a civ to break away, but it needs to be rare, predictable, and somewhat preventable. Civil wars should be the result of a combination of various trigger events, both internal and external. The rarity should be influenced by government type. Predictability would come about by knowing what the trigger events are and where your civ stands in relation to those. Preventability - well, you can influence certain trigger events, but you can't control everything.

I do have a major beef with "capital capture". I have yet to notice any discernible negative effect (other than losing a city and loss of gold - usually not much) on a civ which loses its capital. The capital simply packs up and moves to a new city as if nothing has happened. In fact, you may help a civ by capturing its capital and giving it a free new palace in a city which is better situated for controlling corruption and maintaining trade. You'd be better off simply cutting the capital off from the rest of the civ.

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by sophist


As do I. Significant random events are frustrating because they erode skill.

They do just the opposite. To take the example of a city with 5 wonders being wiped out.... it requires skill to recover from that.

Then on the other hand, if you've managed to build five wonders in a single city, chances are you haven't been up against much challange so far, and so have not needed a great deal of skill.

[Solver]

They do just the opposite. To take the example of a city with 5 wonders being wiped out.... it requires skill to recover from that.

True, but that's not fun. Fun is overcoming challenge posed by the other players, not random disappearance of a city because of a random event.

[sophist]

Originally posted by patcon
I'm OK with the idea of a civil war causing a portion of a civ to break away, but it needs to be rare, predictable, and somewhat preventable. Civil wars should be the result of a combination of various trigger events, both internal and external. The rarity should be influenced by government type. Predictability would come about by knowing what the trigger events are and where your civ stands in relation to those. Preventability - well, you can influence certain trigger events, but you can't control everything.

I think it should be looked at more like real world events like market crashes. You don't know what will set it off, but doing some things makes it more likely and doing other things makes it less likely. The challenge is that things that make it more likely have benefits in other spheres, while things that make it less likely have costs. You have to walk a fine line, but that's the essence of the challenge.

Smoking while filling your car's fuel tank isn't going to blow you up all of the time (or even most of the time), but it's a heck of a lot more likely than if you're not smoking.

Originally posted by General Ludd
They do just the opposite. To take the example of a city with 5 wonders being wiped out.... it requires skill to recover from that.

Then on the other hand, if you've managed to build five wonders in a single city, chances are you haven't been up against much challange so far, and so have not needed a great deal of skill.

Well, the game trusts players to choose the skill level appropriate for them. Few players will choose to play at a level where they have a guaranteed win or have high odds against them. We want it to be hard enough to be a challenge, but easy enough that we can win. If you're playing at a level that lets you get 5 wonders in a city, well, that's your right, and having some random event come along and wipe you out is just going to make you mad. If you're just barely holding your own, again, some random even that comes along and wipes you out is going to make you mad. That's why they need to be smaller. To be worth having in the game, they need to be more frequent. And to keep them from reducing the importance of skill, there needs to be an equal balance of good and bad. So, to summarize: frequent random events of minor significance that can be either good or bad.

Maybe instead of random events, there should be random opportunities, which require you to do something to reap the gain or avoid the hurt. For example, maybe you hear a rumor of some valuable resource that exists far beyond your borders. Do you send an expedition? If you do, you could lose your ship and explorers. If you don't, you could miss a chance to get another source of iron. I can't think of other examples of this kind of thing, but I'm sure there are many.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by General Ludd




They do just the opposite. To take the example of a city with 5 wonders being wiped out.... it requires skill to recover from that.

Take the example of the city with 5 wonders being wiped out... when it's your enemy's city. It takes a lot less skill then.

[Zoid]

There´s no way that that could happen in SP. In MP, well, that´s another thing entirely

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


Take the example of the city with 5 wonders being wiped out... when it's your enemy's city. It takes a lot less skill then.

True enough.


But I enjoy having an occasional wild-card thrown in, regardless.

[Theben]

Originally posted by alva

1. Chieftans are not allowed to do the DL dance. (J/K)
2. Only in the OT

Nah... we get 'em in the A/C and Other Games forums too.

I like random effects, sure they can irritate me but Enjoy the fact that something can mess up your plans, so that you have to improvise.

I like them as well. I think MOO2 had a good set of random occurences, nothing too extreme (like a comet impact), but I can see where some people would like to turn them off. Espec for scenarios.