Re: Petition to change LUCK\\ORDER Scales
 

I would like to see the Disasters toned down a bit for every level of Luck you have.

Sammual

Re: Petition to change LUCK\\ORDER Scales
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I was playing hotseat, only Ulm vs Pythium (to avoid heat/cold effects). I opened only the Ulm turns, so Pythium was totally passive. No spells, no fake disasters...
The test was based on 10 provinces indeed (turn 1 = capital, turn 2 = 4 provinces, turn 3 = 8 provinces, turn 4 = 10 provinces). I've *never* seen more than 2 events/t. BTW.
Dominion was 10 candles to maximize its influence.
By "disaster" I mean big pop loss, no knights, no revolt, not event hailstorms.
To be perfect (I realized too late) I should have made a scenario to remove all magic sites. It is not impossible that one of the test was distorted by a Doom Cloud or something like that...
Could someone confirm/invalidate my tests ?

Cheers

Re: Petition to change LUCK\\ORDER Scales
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Did it:
Order 0 and Luck +3 = 43 events / 80 turns, 9 bad (1 flood) and 34 good events (1500 gold event among others).
Order +3 and Luck 0 = 8 events / 80 turns, 3 bad (still 1 flood !) and 5 good (1 hero even with luck 0).
Any thought ?

Re: Petition to change LUCK\\ORDER Scales
 

The #'s are within the formula's we were given; which is nice to know. It is just the fact of the good events weighing in less than the bad events.

I don't mind 20% Loss of Population event if on the good side I could get a 10% increase.

Re: Petition to change LUCK\\ORDER Scales
 

Did one Last test, as suggested :
Order O and Luck -3 = 39 events / 82 turns, 28 bad events (6 disasters) and still 11 good events.

Re: Petition to change LUCK\\ORDER Scales
 

Hmmm. Order 0 and luck +3. Nearly 4 times as many good events as bad, 1 disaster and one joyous windfall...

Seems viable to me. The 21% less gold on a turn to turn basis will be somewhat painful, but I'd guess largely compensated by the good events. Perhaps there's hope for me in that MP game after all...

Re: Petition to change LUCK\\ORDER Scales
 

One of the best things of the luck scale is the chance of getting mines. If you start in a mountain or get some mountain terrain quick, chances are good you'll start to discover new mines pretty quick. In one game I found three in my home province in 20 turns.

Re: Petition to change LUCK\\ORDER Scales
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Yes. Order does NOT reduce event frequency by 10% per level, assuming this test is representative. More like 25% per level, which makes it even more valuable than previously thought. I think I'll always go with +3 order now. Thanks for all your effort!

-Cherry

P.S. In 0%-5% magic site games, luck is very valuable, as the main source of non-national gems. But otherwise... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif

Re: Petition to change LUCK\\ORDER Scales
 

Awesome work Sunray, we can draw some probabilities from what you have done.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">what we knows from IW : probability of good event at luck 0 : 50%. Adjustment from luck : +-10%

what we deduce from your tests :

probability of drawing an event (max 2) at order 0 : 50%
probability of drawing an event at order 3 : 10%

=> I would say that order modify event probability by +- 13% - 15%

Taking your figures, and computing the theorical numbers now that would give:

order 0 : 36 events / 82 turns
theorically would give 41 events, not far.

order -3 : 88 events events / 82 turns
theorically would give 82 events, not far.

order 3 : 6 events / 123 turns
theorically would give 6 events, perfect fit!
etc.

Common Race designs :

In order we believe :
with Order 3 Luck -3 you have 5% chance of getting an event, with 80% of it being bad.

Lady Luck:
With Order -3 Luck +3, you have one event a turn in average, with 80% of being good.

On the safe side:
With Order 0 Luck +1, you have 50% of having an event, with 60% chances of it being good. (People generally takes that for national heroes too).

Re: Petition to change LUCK\\ORDER Scales
 

I think order/turmoil change the probability of events too much. Perhaps having it match luck scale (i.e. 10% per level) would level order 3/unluck 3 and turmoil 3/luck 3.

Re: Petition to change LUCK\\ORDER Scales
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Yeah... with a weak gold economy, order 3 is very desirable... and with that, there are barely any events, so blowing points on luck is crazy.

-Cherry

[ November 27, 2003, 17:40: Message edited by: Saber Cherry ]

Re: Petition to change LUCK\\ORDER Scales
 

Another person has proposed this before but I can't find who he is http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif .

I think over it the other day and find giving Luck a small income bonus/penalty may also help. The appropriate number should be somewhat similar or slightly less than growth, e.g. +/-2%.

It's not unrealistic - luck help making money. People can still use Order +3/Luck -3. But with the income bonus/penalty acting against each other, it's a self-defeating setting. I have no problem with Order +3/Luck 0 as you have to spend points to get the bonus.

Re: Petition to change LUCK\\ORDER Scales
 

It seems to me that Order-3/Luck+3 becomes viable in fast games on small maps. Possibly even average ones. One of the "tester minded" people who have longer attention spans than I do might want to do a run on this. How do the many good-luck events provide in comparison to high-order taxation?

Actually in my testing of all things "stupid to choose" Ive actually had abit of fun with "stupid" scale settings. For insteance, some races can benefit greatly from the many blessings achievable by taking all -3 scales. Many blessings as in having 4 in every magic (sometimes 5 in each) with one magic at 9 or 10. I started testing this thinking Id have to be take really low dominion power and plan to pretty much abandon the capital province by turn 10 (when most events kick in) but so far it hasnt been all that bad. With some thinking and nations its quite a useable tactic.

Re: Petition to change LUCK\\ORDER Scales
 

Yeah, I forgot, but that's true too... luck+3 is not very useful on huge maps, since the number of events per turn is capped (at 3, right?) no matter how many provinces you own, while income/magic sites increase linearly with province ownership. If events also increased linearly with province ownership - and I see no reason why that should not be the case - luck scale would become more important.

The more I think about it, though, the more I think order should stop affecting the probability of events, or affect it way less (5% per tick, instead of seemingly 25% per tick). Then you could set order and luck independantly, and choose settings other than 3 order, -3 luck or -3 order, 3 luck. Also, luck/unluck scales increasing events would be nice.

Re: Petition to change LUCK\\ORDER Scales
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">If events increased linearly you would drown in events. Events would then be commonplace and more annoying. Your suggestion would not make events more important, just change the importance over time. Now events are important initially, perhaps too much so.

Also: The chance of a second and third event is dependent on the number of provinces you own.