The Mighty Tempest

[Panzeh]

If you're going to have random events, make lots of them happen(scaling the effects appropriately) so that variations due to the random nature of the events are never catastrophic.

Random events are one of those features that must either be done full-scale or not done at all. You can't half-ass it or the game will suffer considerably.

[SSBLoveU]

Originally posted by Anaximander


They are better protected by their ability to know the storm is coming and then move accordingly. Storms still seriously damage and sink modern ships.

I would agree.

[Boris Godunov]

I'm bumping this discussion in light of recent events.

Anyone care to reconsider their opinion?

[Nikolai]

What are you talking about? What events do you think of?

[Adm.Naismith]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
I'm bumping this discussion in light of recent events.

Anyone care to reconsider their opinion?

No. Katrina's passage on New Orleans is dramatic for loss of life and expensive damage, still it's way smaller than the tsunami that has hit far east last winter (and that already was considered during our discussion).

Again, on a Civ gameplay an event like that doesn't change your civilization, like I don't think USA will change its strategic plan, culture or industrial development because of this disaster.

Maybe they'll reconsider a way to manage rescue on so large scale, maybe they'll change by vote some of the politics representative they'll consider not up to the task, but Kyoto advice will stay not considered.

I think that "show must go on" will be the common mantra: on a Civ model, just a bad throwing of dices, as sad as it really is in real life.

[Xorbon]

I think what's happening in New Orleans just shows that natural disasters can cause a huge amount of damage and death, even in a modern 1st World nation. While the effects of disasters can be alleviated with modern technologies and organizational structures, they don't totally eliminate the chances of a disaster happening.

Just because a real-life nation may decide not to implement expensive options (like Kyoto, or disaster response plans, etc.), it doesn't mean those options couldn't be made available in the game.

In game terms, New Orleans would probably lose one pop. point, have a few improvements destroyed, and suffer economic (i.e. commerce) damage for a few turns.

But with all that being said, I've always been a proponent of random events.

[sophist]

What should happen is that the city is destroyed and its inhabitants are turned into refugees (different from settlers and workers). That's sort of what's happening in the real world, except the one US politician who suggested doing the sensible thing and abandoning the city got shouted down.

[M. le Comte]

Originally posted by sophist
What should happen is that the city is destroyed and its inhabitants are turned into refugees (different from settlers and workers). That's sort of what's happening in the real world, except the one US politician who suggested doing the sensible thing and abandoning the city got shouted down.

Another solution: only the rich people can escape, the poor one remain stucked in their devasted city.

And if some poors, unfortunately, have survived, you can allow the police to shoot at them.

So the average income rises.

As a consequence, on average, people are happier.

[SSBLoveU]

Originally posted by sophist
What should happen is that the city is destroyed and its inhabitants are turned into refugees (different from settlers and workers). That's sort of what's happening in the real world, except the one US politician who suggested doing the sensible thing and abandoning the city got shouted down.

The destruction of the city should depend upon the building of aqueducts and other city improvements. Also, the price of oil and its availability per day would change troop movements in time of war. Of course, the leader could dump tons of gold into the city before the disaster or after it is over or he could be a Khan and just allow those poor workers to die so that he could continue his war effort. Also, an advanced technological world would react differently than a warlike backstabbing world.

Originally posted by http://www.fee.org/vnews.php?nid=3804&printable=Y
Little known outside the academic community, he suddenly received much attention when he wrote Death by Government (Transaction, 1994). In the book, Rummel analyzed 8,193 estimates of government killings and reported that throughout history governments have killed more than 300 million people with more than half, or 170 million, killed during the twentieth century. These numbers don't include war deaths! . . .

[Addled Platypus]

we cant change real wars either


I would like to see it in game still