[licker]

Interesting analysis Saber.

For what it's worth, here's how the scales currently work:

For each level of order there is a reduction in the likelyhood of *any* random event.

For each level of turmoil there is an increase in the likelyhood of *any* random event.

For each level of luck the chances of your random event being good are increased by 10% (so for luck 1 its 60/40, luck 2, 70/30, ...)

For each level of misfortune the chances of your random event being bad are increased by 10% (so for misfortune 1 its 40/60, 30/70, ...)

The luck scale has no bearing on the frequency of events happening, and the order scale has no bearing on the ratio of good/bad events.

I'm not sure that the 'fix' (assuming one is required) is to change the effects of those scales. Rather I think that either the frequency of events in general could be tweeked (yes, yes, normal or rare...) or that there could be an additional weight factor attached to the existing events. Already I believe that the events are classified as 'major' and 'minor' (the scale may be larger...), and as such it perhaps makes sense to restrict 'major' events to only provinces where the luck scale is at +3 or -3. Perhaps there should be a small (~5% per level of luck/misfortune) that a 'minor' event is promoted to a 'major' event. A fix like this tones down the extremes while still preserving the flavor of the scales.

Again, my concern is that cost of taking luck or misfortune (and order/turmoil) is not balanced with the current effects of the events. This has been tested to some extent by others (particularly the luck+3 turmoil+3 senario) to show that it is too risky in a competative game to go with +luck and -order, and further that order+3 misfortune+3 are probably the optimal settings for just about anyone. There's nothing de facto wrong with a set up like this, but for a game that otherwise seems to strive for interesting risk/reward senarios, having this senario be so tilted to one side belittles the achievments of the rest of the scales.